Re: [HACKERS] A modest proposal for a FAQ addition

2003-01-15 Thread Bruce Momjian
Tom Lane wrote: > Ian Barwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > On Sunday 12 January 2003 17:55, Bruce Momjian wrote: > >> I can't say "don't use CHAR(n)" because there are valid reasons to use > >> it. > > > I think what Tom is saying is "always use VARCHAR(n) unless you know > > for sure CHAR(n) i

Re: [HACKERS] A modest proposal for a FAQ addition

2003-01-12 Thread Tom Lane
Ian Barwick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sunday 12 January 2003 17:55, Bruce Momjian wrote: >> I can't say "don't use CHAR(n)" because there are valid reasons to use >> it. > I think what Tom is saying is "always use VARCHAR(n) unless you know > for sure CHAR(n) is what you want, because if yo

Re: [HACKERS] A modest proposal for a FAQ addition

2003-01-12 Thread Ian Barwick
On Sunday 12 January 2003 17:55, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > Bruce Momjian writes: > > > OK, new text is: > > > > I think Tom specifically wanted the notion "don't use CHAR(n), it has > > unusual behavior" to appear prominently in the FAQ. The current text > > simply rehashe

Re: [HACKERS] A modest proposal for a FAQ addition

2003-01-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Peter Eisentraut wrote: > Bruce Momjian writes: > > > OK, new text is: > > I think Tom specifically wanted the notion "don't use CHAR(n), it has > unusual behavior" to appear prominently in the FAQ. The current text > simply rehashes the documentation. I can't say "don't use CHAR(n)" because th

Re: [HACKERS] A modest proposal for a FAQ addition

2003-01-12 Thread Peter Eisentraut
Bruce Momjian writes: > OK, new text is: I think Tom specifically wanted the notion "don't use CHAR(n), it has unusual behavior" to appear prominently in the FAQ. The current text simply rehashes the documentation. -- Peter Eisentraut [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---(end of br

Re: [HACKERS] A modest proposal for a FAQ addition

2003-01-12 Thread Bruce Momjian
Ian Barwick wrote: > On Sunday 12 January 2003 06:17, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Tom Lane wrote: > > > Q: Why do I get strange results with a CHAR(n) field? > > > > > > A. Don't use CHAR(n). VARCHAR(n) has the behavior you are probably > > > expecting; on top of which it's more compact and usually f

Re: [HACKERS] A modest proposal for a FAQ addition

2003-01-12 Thread Ian Barwick
On Sunday 12 January 2003 06:17, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Tom Lane wrote: > > Q: Why do I get strange results with a CHAR(n) field? > > > > A. Don't use CHAR(n). VARCHAR(n) has the behavior you are probably > > expecting; on top of which it's more compact and usually faster. > > > > > > I suppose th