On Tue, 13 Feb 2024 at 02:01, Ron Johnson <ronljohnso...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 3:23 PM veem v <veema0...@gmail.com> wrote: > [snip] > >> So it looks like the fixed length data type(like integer, float) should >> be the first choice while choosing the data type of the attributes >> wherever possible, as these are native types. >> > > Correct. > > >> (Like choosing "Integer/float" over "Numeric", "Char" over "Varchar" >> etc). >> > However I do see even in Oracle databases, we have Integer type too, but >> it's suggesting(For e.g. in below blog) to rather go with Number types over >> Integer and Varchar2 over Char, which is opposite of what we are discussing >> here. Is the fixed length data type behaves differently in postgres vs >> oracle and thus should be treated differently? >> >> https://www.databasestar.com/oracle-data-types/ >> > >> >> From above blog:- >> > > Oracle is not Postgresql. WTH are you using an Oracle blog to decide on > Postgresql data types???? > > >> >> >> *When to use CHAR: There should be no reason to use the CHAR data type, >> as it is similar to a VARCHAR2 and it’s better to be consistent.* >> *When to use INTEGER: You should use the NUMBER data type instead.* >> >> > Did you actually read that blog post? > > Have you even read the Postgresql documentation on data types? > > My Apology, If interpreting wrongly. My thought was that , as fixed length data types are native type ones, ideally it should be faster in all the databases. So was comparing with different databases. And mainly as I had worked mainly in Oracle database in the past and so it was a key learning here and seemed totally opposite, so was curious to know. Regards Veem
