On Fri, 2021-11-05 at 09:51 +0000, Grega Jesih wrote: > Suggested current text addendum: > > But, if you consider doing ETL from Postgres database to some outer target > environment and you seek performance in such interfaces, follow the logic > of limited size (varchar or char) data types in your database model. > Because if you make a dataflow of known size types, interface code can take > a big block of data while for text fields you need to check each record.
I am opposed to that. It is not our business to discuss the limitations of a certain third-party software product. If that were something wide-spread, perhaps. But I myself have never seen a problem with "text", as long as the actual size of the data is moderate. > Optional additional remark: > > Another good aspect of known data sizes is easier understanding of field > content and implicit data (length) control. Something like that makes more sense to me. 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". Yours, Laurenz Albe
