From: | "Josh Tolley" <eggyknap(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Crystal <support(at)conceptpatterns(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: The speed problem of Varchar vs. Char |
Date: | 2007-07-08 23:56:41 |
Message-ID: | e7e0a2570707081656s2c0d26fage7fb28998214e6e2@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
On 7/8/07, Crystal <support(at)conceptpatterns(dot)com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Our company need to save contact details into the PostgreSQL database. I
> just begin to learn it, so I got many questions. I am not sure which
> data type I should choose for website address, varchar or char. The
> website address may be very long, and we also don't want to lose the
> speed. Thus, the question is: if we have a large contact database, how
> much slowdown or speed up will be expected if we choose variable length
> rather than fixed length? Thanks forward.
>
> Best Wishes,
> Crystal
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?
>
> http://archives.postgresql.org/
>
See http://www.postgresql.org/docs/8.2/interactive/datatype-character.html
(or whatever the corresponding page is for the version you're using).
Specifically, the following:
Tip: There are no performance differences between these three types,
apart from the increased storage size when using the blank-padded
type. While character(n) has performance advantages in some other
database systems, it has no such advantages in PostgreSQL. In most
situations text or character varying should be used instead.
- Josh
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2007-07-08 23:59:02 | Re: The speed problem of Varchar vs. Char |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-07-08 23:53:52 | Re: [GENERAL] Unable to get postgres running after long time no vacuum |