Re: [GENERAL] text vs. varchar

2010-07-21 Thread Ben Chobot
On Jul 21, 2010, at 9:05 AM, Thom Brown wrote: > On 21 July 2010 16:58, Ben Chobot wrote: >> Is there any difference between "text" and "varchar" data types? (Not >> varchar(n), just varchar.) I can't see a different from the manual page, but >> I'm wondering about index usage or something simi

Re: [GENERAL] text vs. varchar

2010-07-21 Thread Thom Brown
On 21 July 2010 16:58, Ben Chobot wrote: > Is there any difference between "text" and "varchar" data types? (Not > varchar(n), just varchar.) I can't see a different from the manual page, but > I'm wondering about index usage or something similarly subtle. > -- Here's what Tom Lane had to say o

Re: [GENERAL] text vs. varchar

2010-07-21 Thread Peter C. Lai
varchar allows you to define an explicit length of the field, text does not. varchar with a length specified (varchar(n)) is sql92 compliant while varchar() and text are pgsql extensions. On 2010-07-21 08:58:54AM -0700, Ben Chobot wrote: > Is there any difference between "text" and "varchar" data

Re: [GENERAL] text vs. varchar

2010-07-21 Thread Joshua D. Drake
On Wed, 2010-07-21 at 08:58 -0700, Ben Chobot wrote: > Is there any difference between "text" and "varchar" data types? (Not > varchar(n), just varchar.) I can't see a different from the manual page, but > I'm wondering about index usage or something similarly subtle. They are the same thing. So

[GENERAL] text vs. varchar

2010-07-21 Thread Ben Chobot
Is there any difference between "text" and "varchar" data types? (Not varchar(n), just varchar.) I can't see a different from the manual page, but I'm wondering about index usage or something similarly subtle. -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org) To make changes

Re: [GENERAL] text .vs. varchar

2008-08-13 Thread Alvaro Herrera
Martin Gainty wrote: > With Postgres appears that TEXT is preferred over varchar(N) > http://archives.postgresql.org/pgsql-general/2006-03/msg01522.php Implementation-wise, they are exactly the same, modulo length checking. -- Alvaro Herrerahttp://www.CommandProm

Re: [GENERAL] text .vs. varchar

2008-08-13 Thread Martin Gainty
other than intended recipient. Sender does not necessarily endorse content contained within this transmission. > Date: Wed, 13 Aug 2008 08:45:19 -0400 > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > CC: pgsql-general@postgresql.org > Subject: Re: [GENERAL] text .vs. varchar &

Re: [GENERAL] text .vs. varchar

2008-08-13 Thread Bill Moran
In response to Joao Ferreira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > Hello all, > > I have a big database in which much information is stored in TEXT type > columns (I did this initially because I did not want to limit the > maximum size of the string to be stored)... but... > > .. let's say I choose an upper li

[GENERAL] text .vs. varchar

2008-08-13 Thread Joao Ferreira
Hello all, I have a big database in which much information is stored in TEXT type columns (I did this initially because I did not want to limit the maximum size of the string to be stored)... but... .. let's say I choose an upper limit (p.ex. 200) for the string sizes and I start a fresh database

Re: Re[2]: [GENERAL] TEXT vs VARCHAR

2000-10-10 Thread Tom Lane
David Huttleston Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > There is another issue with TEXT vs VARCHAR. A TEXT field is not > handled well by ODBC and MS Access. If there is an index on the TEXT > field, the ODBC link will fail, saying something like "Can Not Index a > OLE field." OLE fields are Access'