On Fri, 7 Dec 2001, Tom Lane wrote:
> Stephan Szabo <sszabo@megazone23.bigpanda.com> writes:
> > Going down is
> > problematic, because if you have a varchar(5) field where one value is say
> > 'abcd' and you make it varchar(3) what happens?
>
> What would actually happen right now is nothing: the value would still
> be 'abcd' and would still read out that way. The 3-char limit would
> only get enforced during inserts and updates of the column.
That's what I figured, but I also assume that'd be "wrong" in a pure sense
since the value is invalid for the new datatype, so I figure its safer
to say up only. :)