Re: Storing a great many fields in a database

2012-07-16 Thread Peter Haworth
I don't know if you are referring to SQLite or other SQL implementations, but there is no varchar in sqlite. You can define a column as varchar but sqlite will give it a type of TEXT internally. SQLite does have some advantages over other dbs in this area. Since it effectively ignores any

Re: Storing a great many fields in a database

2012-07-16 Thread Andre Garzia
Bob, SQLite will always use TEXT and allocate just as much space as necessary to store the information at hand. I think it is a better option. So if you just store 10 chars in that column, the TEXT field will use just that space and nothing more. On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 2:58 PM, Bob Sneidar

Re: Storing a great many fields in a database

2012-07-16 Thread Bob Sneidar
I think then that for SQLITE TEXT is actually synonymous with VARCHAR. It was my understanding that VARCHAR allowed for an economical use of space, but was slower to index. The engine would use just enough space, up to the limit set, to store the values, truncating the excess. I seem to

Re: Storing a great many fields in a database

2012-07-16 Thread Dr. Hawkins
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 11:26 AM, Bob Sneidar b...@twft.com wrote: I think then that for SQLITE TEXT is actually synonymous with VARCHAR. It was my understanding that VARCHAR allowed for an economical use of space, but was slower to index. The engine would use just enough space, up to the

Re: Storing a great many fields in a database

2012-07-16 Thread Ruslan Zasukhin
On 7/16/12 9:08 PM, Andre Garzia an...@andregarzia.com wrote: Hi guys, Let me explain a little LOW LEVEL ideas for VarChar and TEXT ? 1) So Peter says that SQLite always ignore length spec and store only given chars, and Peter think that MOST OTHER dbs will eat 100 chars even if present 1.

Re: Storing a great many fields in a database

2012-07-16 Thread Dr. Hawkins
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 9:50 AM, Peter Haworth p...@lcsql.com wrote: I don't know if you are referring to SQLite or other SQL implementations, but there is no varchar in sqlite. You can define a column as varchar but sqlite will give it a type of TEXT internally. I'm using sqlite at the

Re: Storing a great many fields in a database

2012-07-16 Thread Peter Haworth
The engine (if you mean the Livecode engine) has nothing to do with it, or at least it shouldn't. How VARCHAR works varies between SQL implementations. For sqlite, there is no difference between TEXT and VARCHAR - they end up using only as much storage as needed. Pretty much the same for mySQL,

Re: Storing a great many fields in a database

2012-07-16 Thread Peter Haworth
On Mon, Jul 16, 2012 at 12:07 PM, Dr. Hawkins doch...@gmail.com wrote: If you're only ever going to access this db with LC, I'd probably use true and false as your boolean values. If you plan on using other tools to access it, go with 0 and 1. It's hard to put true into a numeric value

Re: Storing a great many fields in a database

2012-07-16 Thread Bob Sneidar
I did not mean the LC engine I meant the SQL engine (if it is acceptable to refer to it in that way). Bob On Jul 16, 2012, at 12:45 PM, Peter Haworth wrote: The engine (if you mean the Livecode engine) has nothing to do with it, or at least it shouldn't. How VARCHAR works varies between

Re: Storing a great many fields in a database

2012-07-16 Thread Peter M. Brigham
On Jul 16, 2012, at 3:07 PM, Dr. Hawkins wrote: As you noted, using REAL for currency arithmetic will get you into rounding issues but sounds like that's not a problem. One approach I've seen for currency values is to store them as integers including the decimal places, e.g $100.00 would be

Re: Storing a great many fields in a database

2012-07-16 Thread Bob Sneidar
So you are saying we should just get rid of pennies? Actually that story is at the same time shocking, and yet makes perfect sense. It would be a great experiment to do that today and see what happens, especially when people charge n.99 for things. Bob On Jul 16, 2012, at 3:36 PM, Peter M.

Re: Storing a great many fields in a database

2012-07-15 Thread Dr. Hawkins
On Saturday, July 14, 2012, Mark Wieder wrote: Saturday, July 14, 2012, 3:16:25 PM, you wrote: Or split it into two tables, and let my get/set functions figure out which to use, one for currency values, and the other for everything else? OMG. You have that many fields in *one* table? I

Re: Storing a great many fields in a database

2012-07-15 Thread Dr. Hawkins
Ack, iPad pre launched message . . . On Sunday, July 15, 2012, Dr. Hawkins wrote: On Saturday, July 14, 2012, Mark Wieder wrote: Saturday, July 14, 2012, 3:16:25 PM, you wrote: Or split it into two tables, and let my get/set functions figure out which to use, one for currency values,

Re: Storing a great many fields in a database

2012-07-15 Thread Dr. Hawkins
On Saturday, July 14, 2012, Peter Haworth wrote: Are you saying that you want to store the default, override, and actual values in the table row of the database? If so, that deosn't feel right to me. I'd split that into a default table, an override table, and actual value table, each

Re: Storing a great many fields in a database

2012-07-14 Thread Mark Wieder
Doc- Saturday, July 14, 2012, 3:16:25 PM, you wrote: Or split it into two tables, and let my get/set functions figure out which to use, one for currency values, and the other for everything else? OMG. You have that many fields in *one* table? I think you need a serious database redesign. Or

Re: Storing a great many fields in a database

2012-07-14 Thread Peter Haworth
It's a little hard to decipher exactly waht your're trying to achieve here but here's a few thoughts.. Are you saying that you want to store the default, override, and actual values in the table row of the database? If so, that deosn't feel right to me. I'd split that into a default table, an