Re: varchar vs char vs text
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: varchar vs char vs text |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 24880.1013550313@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: varchar vs char vs text ("Brett W. McCoy" <bmccoy@chapelperilous.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: varchar vs char vs text
|
Список | pgsql-novice |
"Brett W. McCoy" <bmccoy@chapelperilous.net> writes: > I'd go with text. It's not SQL92, though. Check. > varchar is technically supposed to have a limit of 255, Certainly not; the spec says The maximum value of <length> is implementation-defined. There may be implementations that are lame enough to limit it to 255, but Postgres isn't one of them. IIRC, we set a rather arbitrary upper limit of 10000000 on the length (mainly on the theory that anything larger is either a typo, or you really don't want a limit at all, in which case you oughta be using text). At least in 7.2, it also works to say just "varchar" with no length limit; this is functionally equivalent to "text" except perhaps for some corner cases involving ambiguous-data-type resolution. But this is not SQL-spec-compliant either. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-novice по дате отправления: