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 <br...@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
