I think that depends on the DB. Using VARCHAR at least gives the engine a chance to optimize storage. CHAR is good for truly fixed length strings.
On Feb 18, 2008 3:56 PM, Graham Leggett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Phil Longstaff wrote: > > > Well, as I originally said, I can use a TEXT type which allows up to 64K > > byte strings. Although not unlimited, I assume this is long enough for > > everyone's purposes. MySQL stores them as 2byte length + chars. I will > > need to check that that libgda has some good method of creating them. > > Of course, I could also just try varchar(2048) instead of varchar(50), > > which should also be sufficient. I assume that the db tries to optimize > > space so that storing a 1000 char string and storing a 1 char string in > > a varchar(2048) don't use the same amount of space. > > Generally, the database doesn't do this - it will allocate 2048 chars, > whether you use 1 char or 1000. The upside of this is that it is very > quick, the downside is that it wastes a lot of space. > > Unlimited or "large" text strings are optimised, only because they have > to be to be stored practically. > > Regards, > Graham > -- > > _______________________________________________ > gnucash-devel mailing list > gnucash-devel@gnucash.org > https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel > > _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
