"Decibel!" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sep 3, 2007, at 7:26 AM, Gregory Stark wrote:
>> Also, incidentally do you have a good reason to use CHAR instead of varchar
>> or
>> text? char(64) will take 64 bytes (actually 68 bytes in 8.2) even if you
>> don't
>> store anything more in it. text o
On Sep 3, 2007, at 7:26 AM, Gregory Stark wrote:
Also, incidentally do you have a good reason to use CHAR instead of
varchar or
text? char(64) will take 64 bytes (actually 68 bytes in 8.2) even
if you don't
store anything more in it. text or varchar will take only as many
bytes as the
data
"Stefan Arentz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there a way to speed up simple schema changes like ...
>
> ALTER TABLE foo ADD COLUMN bar CHAR(64);
>
> ... where foo already contains millions of records?
>
> On a live database changes like this can take hours. Even when the
> database is idle.
Is there a way to speed up simple schema changes like ...
ALTER TABLE foo ADD COLUMN bar CHAR(64);
... where foo already contains millions of records?
On a live database changes like this can take hours. Even when the
database is idle.
Is there a better way to do this?
S.
--
