Re: The speed problem of Varchar vs. Char
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: The speed problem of Varchar vs. Char |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 18910.1183939142@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | The speed problem of Varchar vs. Char (Crystal <support@conceptpatterns.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: The speed problem of Varchar vs. Char
|
Список | pgsql-general |
Crystal <support@conceptpatterns.com> writes: > Our company need to save contact details into the PostgreSQL database. I > just begin to learn it, so I got many questions. I am not sure which > data type I should choose for website address, varchar or char. Use varchar. Or text, if you don't have a specific upper limit in mind. > The website address may be very long, and we also don't want to lose the > speed. Thus, the question is: if we have a large contact database, how > much slowdown or speed up will be expected if we choose variable length > rather than fixed length? Thanks forward. Once upon a time, in the days of 80-column punch cards and no variable-length character encodings, there were databases that could handle fixed-width character fields a bit faster than variable-width. That doesn't apply to Postgres. There is no, none, nada performance advantage to char(n), and you should never use it unless your application data clearly demands a specific field width. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: