Re: Grammar about supporting string longer than 32000 characters

In case of dataframe we can take the varchar(max) as default. -- Sent from: http://apache-carbondata-dev-mailing-list-archive.1130556.n5.nabble.com/

Re: Grammar about supporting string longer than 32000 characters

In traditional RDBMS, varchar(N) means the value contains at least N characters, at the DBMS will truncate the value if its length is longer than N. Will we implement like this too? Truncate the string value to N if its length is longer than N?

Re: Grammar about supporting string longer than 32000 characters

+1 for solution 2 On Wed, 2 May 2018 at 9:09 PM, ravipesala wrote: > Hi, > > I agree with option 2 but not new datatype use varchar(size). > There are more optimizations we can do with varchar(size) datatype like > 1. if the size is smaller (less than 8 bytes) then we can

Re: Grammar about supporting string longer than 32000 characters

Hi, I agree with option 2 but not new datatype use varchar(size). There are more optimizations we can do with varchar(size) datatype like 1. if the size is smaller (less than 8 bytes) then we can write in fixed length encoder instead of LV encode it can save a lot of space and memory. 2. If the

Grammar about supporting string longer than 32000 characters

Hi, community: I'm implementing supporting string longer than 32000 characters in carbondata and have a question about the grammar of this feature. Here I'd like to explain it and want to receive your feedbacks. DESCRIPTION： In previous implementation, carbondata internally uses a short to