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
Dear Cristian, If you need to index the field, you must know that it limit the length up to 1000 bytes. So if you need to index the field you must limit the field type, ex: varchar(250), than you can index the field and you can gain better perfomance in searching base on the fields, because the se

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