Thanks a lot. On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 7:35 PM, Martijn Tonies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > You pretty much answered your own question. A char will always use the > > same amount of space (the max size), regardless of how little data you > > put in it. A varchar will only use enough space to store the data, so > > the amount of space used for each record will be different. You can > > also specify a max size for varchar. Text is like varchar, but with a > > "fixed" max size of 65,000 characters. > > That's actually not entirely true :-) > > Yes, it holds true for MySQL because of it's rather crappy implementation > on data storage in the current engines. > > There's a -logical- difference between CHAR and VARCHAR in which > CHAR always adds padded spaces and VARCHAR strips these. > > However, as I said, this is a -logical- difference. The space that is > needed > for storage is a physical issue which is implementation defined. Another > storage engine can store CHAR and VARCHAR the same if it likes to do > that and so the space requirements can be (more or less) the same. > > To answer this question truely, you need to know what storage engine is > used AND you need to know how the storage is implemented. > > > > char limit 255 character fixed length > > > varchar limit 65,000 character variable length > > > text limit 65,000 character variable length. > > > Martijn Tonies > Database Workbench - tool for InterBase, Firebird, MySQL, NexusDB, Oracle & > MS SQL Server > Upscene Productions > http://www.upscene.com > My thoughts: > http://blog.upscene.com/martijn/ > Database development questions? Check the forum! > http://www.databasedevelopmentforum.com > > > -- > MySQL General Mailing List > For list archives: http://lists.mysql.com/mysql > To unsubscribe: > http://lists.mysql.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > -- Krishna Chandra Prajapati
