| From: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Rui DeSousa <rui(at)crazybean(dot)net> |
| Cc: | raf <raf(at)raf(dot)org>, "pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-admin(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL CHARACTER VARYING vs CHARACTER VARYING (Length) |
| Date: | 2020-04-29 05:09:28 |
| Message-ID: | CAKFQuwaJkFnEitSah3eRHABgTXBJ22KoMRQq-fAm_+6N0jV7fw@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-admin pgsql-hackers |
On Tuesday, April 28, 2020, Rui DeSousa <rui(at)crazybean(dot)net> wrote:
>
> Don’t fool yourself, you are not future proofing your application; what
> really is happening is a slow creeping data quality issue which later needs
> a special project just clean up.
>
I don’t use text instead of varchar(n) for future proofing and use it quite
well within well defined relational schemas. Using varchar(n) in a table
always has a better solution, use text and a constraint.
David J.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Rui DeSousa | 2020-04-29 05:26:03 | Re: PostgreSQL CHARACTER VARYING vs CHARACTER VARYING (Length) |
| Previous Message | Rui DeSousa | 2020-04-29 04:57:29 | Re: PostgreSQL CHARACTER VARYING vs CHARACTER VARYING (Length) |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Fabien COELHO | 2020-04-29 05:09:41 | Re: Proposing WITH ITERATIVE |
| Previous Message | Rui DeSousa | 2020-04-29 04:57:29 | Re: PostgreSQL CHARACTER VARYING vs CHARACTER VARYING (Length) |