MB Software Solutions General Account wrote: > http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/5.1/en/numeric-types.html > > If you know you're not going to have more than 255 records in a lookup > table, it'd make perfect sense to have your PK be a TINYINT instead of > INT (or any other integer type for that matter)? By default (I guess > leftover from Fox thinking), I've always just used INT, but on review it > doesn't make sense to store bytes you're not gonna use. > > Your thoughts?
You are thinking too hard. If the table is that small, and will always be that small, the difference in the total number of bytes with int versus tinyint isn't worth thinking about. Just go with int and worry about your real business problems. Paul _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
