Hi Stephen, I have a SQLite database that was ported from mysql. Most of the column definitions remain unchanged. There is lots of CHAR and VARCHAR definitions and contrary to Simon's response they mean what they say. 90+ % of the data is fixed length CHAR. (codes and fixed labels). When the database was originally converted to sqlite (around 3.7 era) the TEXT versus CHAR was benchmarked. We could not discern any difference on queries. Affinity is a great tool for keeping your schema portable. The grumblers have too much spare time on their hands.
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 2:51 AM Stephen Chrzanowski <pontia...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hey all; > > I've seen it grumbled about before about giving a field a property of CHAR, > and have seen the correction that it should be TEXT. I understand that > SQLite doesn't really "care" what the contents of the field is, but, just > out of curiosity, is there a kind of performance hit on using CHAR versus > TEXT or INT versus INTEGER? > > Other than translating from one database engine to another, and with the > fact that SQLite doesn't care what the affinity is (Other than for internal > workings), I can't seem to think that there'd be a big hit since it needs > to determine what that value is supposed to be when reporting back to the > application. > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org > http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
