I mostly retained <<Do you *really* need to worry about the extra overhead of varchar
vs int? Probably not.>>
Jacques
From: "David E Jones" <[email protected]>
Uggh....
That post mentions this: "What you *should* be thinking about is do you really want a varchar PK? Generally speaking, it's better
to use a phantom PK (ie: a SERIAL), and put a UNIQUE constraint on the varchar in the appropriate table."
IMO that is nothing short of horrible database design and complicates data models and applications significantly. There is lots
of good literature showing a better way (ie natural keys), like Joe Celko who has been mentioned on this list a few times.
Of course, as with any practice there are those for and against it.
In absence of requirements and objectives to guide you, the only answer is it doesn't matter, you can go sit in the sun for all
it matters because you haven't decided what you want to do. Once details are in place, then you can decide.
-David
On Feb 17, 2009, at 1:17 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
EnterpriseDB guys know what they are talking about (they are offering Postgres
commercial support)
http://markmail.org/message/7ykdxmvc7fvonx5q
Jacques
PS : OK, I'm a Postgres fan
Jacques
From: "BJ Freeman" <[email protected]>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
there was not statement on comparison, you are correct.
have you done a test though to see what the real difference in msec is,
on what you define as a large database.
Sven Wesley sent the following on 2/17/2009 11:28 AM:
Sorry guys, but I don't agree on the first point. An Integer or Number as
primary will always win the time race compared to a varchar, specially if
there's a group or order clause included. I do agree about the flexibility
(that also comes with other complexities), but the performance issue is
unfortunately not that simple. Of course, it's also a matter of how big your
database is. The bigger the worse.
Regards,
Sven
2009/2/17 Jacques Le Roux <[email protected]>
2d or 3d time this question is asked : time for a FAQ
http://docs.ofbiz.org/display/OFBIZ/FAQ+-+Tips+-+Tricks+-+Cookbook+-+HowTo#FAQ-Tips-Tricks-Cookbook-HowTo-WhyprimarykeysareVARCHARtypeinOFBiz
Thanks David
Jacques
From: "David E Jones" <[email protected]>
1. The performance overhead is minimal on modern database systems.
2. Character strings give significant flexibility, especially when it is
common to migrate data from other systems that have
characters in their IDs.
3. Being able to prefix IDs is used in a number of places in OFBiz,
including prefixes for entire systems when data transfers
between them are done to separate ID spaces.
Welcome to the real world! ;)
-David
On Feb 17, 2009, at 8:05 AM, Dhruv Datta wrote:
Hello Frns,
I am a *newbie* in OFBiz and was playing with the OFBiz.
During my play I found that in OFBiz data type for all the primary keys
are VAR-CHAR, but VAR-CHAR data type is not a good practice for the
efficiency perspective because it takes extra time during searching. Can
anyone please tell me why OFBiz uses VAR-CHAR data type used for primary
key
instead of NUMERIC data type.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Dhruv.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFJmxQ6rP3NbaWWqE4RAkfjAKClPAs2o0o58AdYXTNWxsxK/+tAQgCePrLa
Z7El/e8xhPwsbThwrEuo8zU=
=58Or
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
