If you're EVER going to use unicode, you should use it from the beginning. Retrofitting later is a pain in the ass.
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/35366/varchar-vs-nvarchar-performance You could also consider consolidating them both into an nvarchar(max) instead of an nvarchar(255) field for small and a text field for large notes, unless there's a good reason for it. Seems a little overly complicated to me. These are only relevant if you remain on MSSQL 2008+, though... On Wed, Feb 20, 2013 at 2:51 PM, Michael Dinowitz < mdino...@houseoffusion.com> wrote: > > I've got a notes application that uses generic storage for the notes. If > the note is short, it is stored in the stringnote table which is a > varchar(255). If the note is longer, it is stored in the textnote table > which is text. Should these tables be storing in unicode from the start or > should I have a separate unicodestringnote table? Less than 5% of the notes > will have unicode values and I want the data structure to be as efficient > as possible. I'm using MSSQL 2008 as a base but may move to something more > portable if/when I release the app. > > Thanks > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/sql/message.cfm/messageid:3507 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/sql/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/sql/unsubscribe.cfm
