On Tue, 2011-11-22 at 15:55 +, Gregg Jaskiewicz wrote:
for the future it is better to just use text type, and: check
length(field) 35;
thanks to all for the respones.
The above seems a prudent way to go in my future.
My assumption is that converting varchar(n) to text would still force a
Reid Thompson reid.thomp...@ateb.com writes:
My assumption is that converting varchar(n) to text would still force a
re-write of the table? i.e. currently there's no officially 'safe' way
to convert the field type w/o incurring a table re-write.
If you do it through ALTER TABLE, yes. Since
reporting=# select version();
version
--
PostgreSQL 8.3.7 on x86_64-redhat-linux-gnu, compiled by GCC gcc (GCC)
4.1.2 20071124 (Red Hat
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 7:50 AM, Reid Thompson reid.thomp...@ateb.com wrote:
Note that I manually added the 4 to the desired size of 35..again, for
some legacy reasons inside PG. Done. That's it. Should we check?
d TABLE1
TABLE public.TABLE1
COLUMN | TYPE | Modifiers
for the future it is better to just use text type, and: check
length(field) 35;
--
Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@postgresql.org)
To make changes to your subscription:
http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Scott Marlowe scott.marl...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 7:50 AM, Reid Thompson reid.thomp...@ateb.com wrote:
Note that I manually added the 4 to the desired size of 35..again, for
some legacy reasons inside PG. Done. That's it. Should we check?
