From: Doug Fields <dfields-pg-general@pexicom.com>
To: pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Efficiency question: VARCHAR with empty string vs NULL
Date: Fri, 24 May 2002 13:20:43 -0400
Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.2.20020524131720.02c09fa0@mail.pexicom.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5589.1022165353@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0205231506380.12663-100000@ponder.fairway2k.co.uk>
<Pine.LNX.4.21.0205231506380.12663-100000@ponder.fairway2k.co.uk>
Hello,
I have a table with about 15-20 VARCHAR items. I use VARCHAR on the
assumption that it is more space efficient and not too much slower than
CHAR, especially when you expect many of those VARCHAR to be null or empty
strings.
Is there a performance difference with VARCHAR elements of value NULL and
zero-length string? If so, can I assume that NULL is the better performer,
and thus re-code my INSERTS to replace empty strings with NULLs (or vice
versa)?
Now that I've had to re-write all my data to substring it to fit in the
VARCHARs, one more "thing" won't matter much.
Many Thanks,
Doug
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-sql@postgresql.org
Cc: dfields-pg-general@pexicom.com, pgsql-general@postgresql.org
Subject: Re: Efficiency question: VARCHAR with empty string vs NULL
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020524131720.02c09fa0@mail.pexicom.com>
* 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