From: Grega Jesih <Grega.Jesih@actual-it.si>
To: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>
To: David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Cc: Pg Docs <pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: RE: text fields and performance for ETL
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 2021 09:44:37 +0000
Message-ID: <2def7f5785d042b1b4a11d6b712b39a5@actual-it.si> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <12598e4d44a8bf530934e793fde9ab2743108046.camel@cybertec.at>
References: <686716cb5c4242c28e5967d9b6fcfc75@actual-it.si>
<137264.1635961048@sss.pgh.pa.us>
<c57e7a702932465ca9962d4f5d332c3a@actual-it.si>
<CAKFQuwYFfESp=xUpktYBbW8TxO8k=+uWN8F2G5Ehis2cpYuDnw@mail.gmail.com>
<70cf9fe110c246afb4eab054caab0c04@actual-it.si>
<CAKFQuwbX37AwNcKHMeaOq+LS_nhw_6sHwaUK1+UsQ8Nuo7bcfg@mail.gmail.com>
<516dc58b80fa418091f5262879019213@actual-it.si>
<b288134ae2290d5abc2a2d516a8d58892a656f30.camel@cybertec.at>
<20211105141712.GA19812@momjian.us>
<CAKFQuwbVkQAySX+KPiQT8miAP4D0mgG-xzZDCCxtb8DFB0NTog@mail.gmail.com>
<20211105152733.GC19812@momjian.us>
<12598e4d44a8bf530934e793fde9ab2743108046.camel@cybertec.at>
Dear Moderators,
with this approach, why don't you eliminate char and varchar then ?
Thanks for thinking over.
BR
Grega
-----Original Message-----
From: Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at>
Sent: Saturday, November 6, 2021 6:28 AM
To: Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us>; David G. Johnston <david.g.johnston@gmail.com>
Cc: Grega Jesih <Grega.Jesih@actual-it.si>; Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>; Pg Docs <pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org>
Subject: Re: text fields and performance for ETL
On Fri, 2021-11-05 at 11:27 -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 5, 2021 at 07:32:12AM -0700, David G. Johnston wrote:
> > On Friday, November 5, 2021, Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Perhaps, right before the tip you quoted, something like that:
> > >
> > > If your use case requires a length limit on character data,
> > or
> > compliance
> > > with the SQL standard is important, use "character varying".
> > > Otherwise, you are usually better off with "text".
> >
> > I can support that if others think it is valuable.
> >
> >
> >
> > The motivating complaint is that we should be encouraging people to
> > use varchar
> > (4000) instead of text so external tools can optimize. If we are
> > not going to do that I really don’t see the pointing in changing
> > away from out current position of “only use text”. True length
> > limit requirements for data are rare, and better done in constraints
> > along with all other the other constraint that may exist for the
> > data. I believe comments with respect to the SQL standard are already present and adequate.
>
> Agreed.
+1, so let's leave it as it is.
Yours,
Laurenz Albe
NOTICE - NOT TO BE REMOVED.
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may contain legally privileged information and/or copyright material of Actual I.T. or third parties. If you are not an authorised recipient of this e-mail, please contact Actual I.T. immediately by return email or by telephone or facsimile on the above numbers.
You should not read, print, re-transmit, store or act in reliance on this email or any attachments and you should destroy all copies of them.
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: pgsql-docs@postgresql.org
Cc: Grega.Jesih@actual-it.si, laurenz.albe@cybertec.at, bruce@momjian.us, david.g.johnston@gmail.com, tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us, pgsql-docs@lists.postgresql.org
Subject: RE: text fields and performance for ETL
In-Reply-To: <2def7f5785d042b1b4a11d6b712b39a5@actual-it.si>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by DDX for PostgreSQL; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox