Re: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance

From: "Thomas G(dot) Lockhart" <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Darren King <darrenk(at)insightdist(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance
Date: 1998-03-11 16:15:39
Message-ID: 3506B8AB.E69E0F74@alumni.caltech.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Will there be a warning about using a "depreciated type" in 6.4 or are
> we going to have this gunking up the grammer forever? :)

Good idea. Then we can pull it out of the grammar sometime later. Now,
if these types are in a loadable module, then we can't actually do
anything in the parser anyway, since the loadable module would never
work. Are these character types worth keeping at all? Less support and
no performance benefit leaves me thinking not...

- Tom

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Darren King 1998-03-11 16:37:11 Re: [HACKERS] varchar() vs char16 performance
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 1998-03-11 15:53:10 Re: [HACKERS] attlen weirdness?