Re: Chante domain type - Postgres 9.2

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Rakesh Kumar <rakeshkumar464(at)outlook(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Chante domain type - Postgres 9.2
Date: 2016-09-26 12:59:45
Message-ID: 27315.1474894785@sss.pgh.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

Rakesh Kumar <rakeshkumar464(at)outlook(dot)com> writes:
> Can you elaborate? Why would anyone create a text column to store customer name or product name which can very well be in varchar(50) type of cols.

You sound like you think that varchar(50) is somehow cheaper than text.
That's backwards (at least in PG, other DBMSes may be different).
There's no advantage storage-wise, and there is a cost, namely the cost
of applying the length check on every update.

If you feel that you must have a check for application-specific reasons,
then sure, use varchar(n). But the number had better be one that you
can trace to crystal-clear application requirements. varchar(n) where
n has been plucked from the air is a good sign of bad database design.

regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Rakesh Kumar 2016-09-26 13:08:14 Re: Chante domain type - Postgres 9.2
Previous Message Rakesh Kumar 2016-09-26 12:51:33 Re: Chante domain type - Postgres 9.2