happen? Transactional overhead (which is basically making a copy of changed
data until it is committed) is exactly this process, so if you're using
transactions, this is happening anyway.
> VARCHAR and Memo fields are stored in some other file or part
> of the database, only their address, which
> is fixed length, is stored in the table. This is one of the
> reasons you have VARCHARs, and why you cannot
> index them. Otherwise, what would be the big difference
> between a VARCHAR and a regular TEXT field?
You've got this wrong. CHAR and VARCHAR are stored in-row, making them
quite fast, but limited in size. TEXT fields are a fixed-width column,
though they require additional storage "somewhere" which makes their use
more expensive, but can be MUCH larger.
Cheers,
barneyb
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Claude Schneegans [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 3:48 PM
> To: CF-Talk
> Subject: Re: Which to use as primary key?
>
> >>Actually, most records aren't the same size. The only way
> they'll all be
> the same size is if all you columns in the table are fixed size.
>
> I don't know exactly how large databases like Oracle work
> internally, but at least with dBase, foxPro Access, etc.
> all records are the same size.
> If the records are not the same size, this means relocationg
> it every time it is updated and becomes larger,
> not really efficient.
> It also means that indexes must contain the physical address
> to the byte, not only the record #, and this takes more space.
>
> >>Notably VARCHAR is not,
>
>
> --
> _______________________________________
> REUSE CODE! Use custom tags;
> See http://www.contentbox.com/claude/customtags/tagstore.cfm
> (Please send any spam to this address: [EMAIL PROTECTED])
> Thanks.
>
>
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
