Re: [NOVICE] varchar vs varchar(n)

Поиск
Список
Период
Сортировка
От john snow
Тема Re: [NOVICE] varchar vs varchar(n)
Дата
Msg-id CAE67tvXOwur4=F1junEu2oezDt6RFEQ=z3Vzu86C6fZ4v_6C+A@mail.gmail.com
обсуждение исходный текст
Ответ на Re: [NOVICE] varchar vs varchar(n)  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
Ответы Re: [NOVICE] varchar vs varchar(n)  (Ken Benson <Ken@infowerks.com>)
Список pgsql-novice
thanks!

On Sun, Nov 12, 2017 at 2:34 PM, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
john snow <ofbizfanster@gmail.com> writes:
> do postgresql developers just use varchar instead of specifying a limit n
> when dealing with string types? if so, are there any gotcha's i should be
> aware of?

Generally speaking, I would only use varchar(n) when there is a clear
reason traceable to application requirements why there has to be a
limit, and why the limit should be n and not some other number.
Otherwise you're just creating issues for yourself.  The habit of
inventing arbitrary limits on text column width is just a hangover
from punched-card days.

Actually, Postgres people tend to use "text" rather than unconstrained
"varchar".  In principle those two types behave equivalently; but the
system has to jump through some extra hoops to work with varchar, and
every so often you'll run into a case where "varchar" is not optimized
as well as "text".

                        regards, tom lane

В списке pgsql-novice по дате отправления:

Предыдущее
От: Tom Lane
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [NOVICE] varchar vs varchar(n)
Следующее
От: pinker
Дата:
Сообщение: Re: [NOVICE] array_agg cast issue