From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Joe <svn(at)freedomcircle(dot)net> |
Cc: | Dawid Kuroczko <qnex42(at)gmail(dot)com>, pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Converting MySQL tinyint to PostgreSQL |
Date: | 2005-07-12 21:15:16 |
Message-ID: | 25840.1121202916@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Joe <svn(at)freedomcircle(dot)net> writes:
> I never would've imagined *that* amount of overhead for CHAR(1)! I
> would've imagined that it would take up one byte (or two with a NULL
> indicator). After all, we're not talking about VARCHAR(1) [which is
> sort of useless]. Don't the catalogs know the declared length and if
> so, why the length overhead?
Because the length specification is in *characters*, which is not by any
means the same as *bytes*.
We could possibly put enough intelligence into the low-level tuple
manipulation routines to count characters in whatever encoding we happen
to be using, but it's a lot faster and more robust to insist on a count
word for every variable-width field.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2005-07-12 21:21:57 | Re: Checkpoints are occurring too frequently... |
Previous Message | Scott Marlowe | 2005-07-12 21:09:11 | Re: Checkpoints are occurring too frequently... |