And “n” is so informative...please. The name of the field tells me most of what I care about, the “n” and/or constraint are fluff.
That was your recommendation; so I’m confused as to why it’s no longer valid.
Also, when porting the schema to a different database engine and the create table statement fails because it’s too wide and doesn’t fit on a page; the end result is having to go back and redefine the text fields as varchar(n)/char(n) anyway.
Not something I’m concerned about and if that other db doesn’t have something like TOAST it seems like an undesirable target.
Fine, I assume you will be employed by your employer in perpetuity and the system will remain on PostgreSQL.