Received: from localhost (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF630476D56 for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2002 17:00:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from davinci.ethosmedia.com (davinci.ethosmedia.com [209.10.40.250]) by postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E786B476C72 for ; Fri, 1 Nov 2002 17:00:18 -0500 (EST) Received: from [66.219.92.2] (HELO chocolate-mousse) by davinci.ethosmedia.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 3.5.9) with ESMTP id 1808822; Fri, 01 Nov 2002 14:02:36 -0800 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" From: Josh Berkus Reply-To: josh@agliodbs.com Organization: Aglio Database Solutions To: Philip Hallstrom Subject: Re: Does this matter? Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 14:00:09 -0800 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.4] Cc: Wei Weng , References: <20021101125052.Y6303-100000@cypress.adhesivemedia.com> In-Reply-To: <20021101125052.Y6303-100000@cypress.adhesivemedia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200211011400.09915.josh@agliodbs.com> X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS new-20020517 X-Archive-Number: 200211/15 X-Sequence-Number: 173 Phillip, > 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. >=20 > http://www.postgresql.org/idocs/index.php?datatype-character.html Actually, that note is intended to tell people that CHAR is not any faster= =20 than VARCHAR for the same-length string ... since CHAR *is* faster than=20 VARCHAR in some systems, like MS SQL Server. --=20 -Josh Berkus