varchar() vs char16 performance
От | Thomas G. Lockhart |
---|---|
Тема | varchar() vs char16 performance |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 3506A21B.AEA75623@alumni.caltech.edu обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance
Re: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance Re: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
I ran some timing tests to check the performance of varchar() vs char16. The results of the test indicate that there is no difference in performance (within the timing scatter of the tests): char16 vc(16) 0.99s 1.05s 1 row (this measures startup time, not types) 39.29s 39.28s ~65000 rows The char2,4,8,16 types seem to have no value-added over the better-supported char(), varchar(), text types; I am considering removing them from the backend, and instead have the parser transparently translate the types into varchar() (or char() - I'm not certain which is a better match for the types) for v6.4. Applications would not have to be changed. Comments? - Tom The test is included below: -- create table c16 (c char16); create table c16 (c varchar(16)); copy c16 from 'c16.copy'; select count(*) from c16 where c = 'hi there'; select count(*) from c16 where c = 'test string'; select count(*) from c16 where c != 'hi there'; select count(*) from c16 where c != 'test string'; delete from c16; drop table c16;
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: