Re: char(N), varchar(N), varchar, text
| От | Andrew Dunstan |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: char(N), varchar(N), varchar, text |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | 54354A73.6030607@dunslane.net обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | char(N), varchar(N), varchar, text (Emi Lu <emilu@encs.concordia.ca>) |
| Ответы |
Re: char(N), varchar(N), varchar, text
|
| Список | pgsql-performance |
On 10/08/2014 10:22 AM, Emi Lu wrote: > Good morning, > > For performance point of view, are there big differences between: > char(N), varchar(N), varchar, text? > > Some comments from google shows: > No difference, under the hood it's all varlena. Check this article > from Depesz: > http://www.depesz.com/index.php/2010/03/02/charx-vs-varcharx-vs-varchar-vs-text/ > A couple of highlights: > > To sum it all up: > > * char(n) – takes too much space when dealing with values > shorter than n, and can lead to subtle errors because of > adding trailing spaces, plus it is problematic to change the limit > * varchar(n) – it's problematic to change the limit in live > environment > * varchar – just like text > * text – for me a winner – over (n) data types because it lacks > their problems, and over varchar – because it has distinct name > > So, can I assume no big performance differences? > Thanks alot! > Emi > Why do you need to ask if you already have the answer? Depesz is right. cheers andrew
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: