Re: [PERFORM] Text/Varchar performance...

2005-10-10 Thread Steinar H. Gunderson
On Mon, Oct 10, 2005 at 06:28:23PM +0700, Ahmad Fajar wrote: > than you can index the field and you can gain better > perfomance in searching base on the fields, because the search uses the > index you have been created. That really depends on the queries. An index will help some queries (notably

Re: [PERFORM] Text/Varchar performance...

2005-10-10 Thread Ahmad Fajar
: Kamis, 06 Oktober 2005 1:22 To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org; pgsql-performance@postgresql.org Subject: [PERFORM] Text/Varchar performance... Hello, just a little question, It's preferable to use Text Fields or varchar(255) fields in a table? Are there any performance differences in the use of a

Re: [PERFORM] Text/Varchar performance...

2005-10-05 Thread Josh Berkus
Cristian, > Hello, just a little question, It's preferable to use Text Fields or > varchar(255) fields in a table? Are there any performance differences in > the use of any of them? TEXT, VARCHAR, and CHAR use the same underlying storage mechanism. This means that TEXT is actually the "fastest

Re: [PERFORM] Text/Varchar performance...

2005-10-05 Thread Steinar H. Gunderson
On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 12:21:35PM -0600, Cristian Prieto wrote: > Hello, just a little question, It's preferable to use Text Fields or > varchar(255) fields in a table? Are there any performance differences in the > use of any of them? They are essentially the same. Note that you can have varchar

[PERFORM] Text/Varchar performance...

2005-10-05 Thread Cristian Prieto
Hello, just a little question, It's preferable to use Text Fields or varchar(255) fields in a table? Are there any performance differences in the use of any of them? Thanks a lot for your answer! ---(end of broadcast)--- TIP 4: Have you searched ou