| From: | Jason Earl <jason(dot)earl(at)simplot(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Singer Wang <swang(at)cs(dot)dal(dot)ca> |
| Cc: | pgsql-novice(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: varchar vs char vs text |
| Date: | 2002-02-12 20:41:03 |
| Message-ID: | 87d6za77s0.fsf@npa01zz001.simplot.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-novice |
Singer Wang <swang(at)cs(dot)dal(dot)ca> writes:
> if I have a column that's gonna be between 5-300 charactors...
> should I go with a a charactor? varchar? or a text?
>
> what's the performance penalty going with a text instead of a
> varchar... or a char? I don't need to index it.... nor search based
> on it..
PostgreSQL's varchar and text are both based on the same internal
type. Varchar only limits the length of the string that can be
inserted. Char pads the strings with ' ' to the desired lengh. In
other words if I were to insert 'Jason' into a char(8) it would be
padded to 'Jason '.
In other words, use varchar if you have a hard limit that you want to
enforce, char if you want to guarantee string lengths, and text for
everything else.
Jason
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Brett W. McCoy | 2002-02-12 21:01:34 | Re: varchar vs char vs text |
| Previous Message | Singer Wang | 2002-02-12 20:19:54 | varchar vs char vs text |