On Fri, Nov 01, 2002 at 12:53:29PM -0800, Philip Hallstrom wrote:
> > is padded out to the specified length. Therefore the index on a char(36)
> > column will be a little larger, and thus a little slower, than the char(20).
> >
>
> Really? According to this url (search for "Tip") there is no performance
> difference just a space difference. I don't know for sure either way, but
> if there is a difference the manual needs updating.
Hmm. Maybe a clarification, but I don't think this is quite what the
tip is talking about. The tip points out that part of the cost is
"the increased storage" from the blank-padded type (char) as
contrasted with non-padded types (like text). The tip isn't talking
about whether a length of 20 is faster than a length of 36. Anyway,
I can't really believe the length would be a big deal except on
really huge tables.
A
--
----
Andrew Sullivan 204-4141 Yonge Street
Liberty RMS Toronto, Ontario Canada
<andrew@libertyrms.info> M2P 2A8
+1 416 646 3304 x110
