Re: VARCHAR2(1) vs CHAR(1)

Thank Richard. :)
Just two note:

> Note it's actually possible for Char to worsen performance rather than
> improve it (although not so much in your example). Why, because large char
> values potentially waste space.

I refer to char with size of 1 or 2 (as in original message).

> The nice thing about chars are that updates don't cause char values to
> increase in length. If updates don't affect row size then row migration will
> not be a problem and potential issues there can be avoided.

Avoiding row chaining is a good reason, that I didn't consider before. Learning never stop. :)

thank again.. :)

Marco Received on Tue Jul 30 2002 - 16:05:43 CDT