Subject | Re: Charset of OCTETS in PK causing problems? |
---|---|
Author | peter_jacobi.rm |
Post date | 2004-06-16T15:04:37Z |
Hi Raymond,
"rjschappe" wrote:
later, when and if I get more insights from test), what's the
deal with the space saving here?
Whether you store '123ABC' in CHARSET OCTETS or in
CHARSET ASCII or in CHARSET NONE, doesn't make any
difference in size. All will take 6 bytes.
Perhaps you are misled by the automatic display-as-hex
in ISQL, but using it this way, you cannot gain any size advantage.
You can use the compres your keys to fit into 8 bytes of
CHARSET OCTETS, but this isn't pretty at all.
Regards,
Peter Jacobi
"rjschappe" wrote:
> I finally got around to changing all my Primary Keys and Foreign KeysApart from the problem you run into (on which I'll comment
> (which are 13 chars and only contain A-Z,0-9) to Charset of OCTETS to
> reduce the space used... with the idea that more space=more indicies
> on page=faster queries
later, when and if I get more insights from test), what's the
deal with the space saving here?
Whether you store '123ABC' in CHARSET OCTETS or in
CHARSET ASCII or in CHARSET NONE, doesn't make any
difference in size. All will take 6 bytes.
Perhaps you are misled by the automatic display-as-hex
in ISQL, but using it this way, you cannot gain any size advantage.
You can use the compres your keys to fit into 8 bytes of
CHARSET OCTETS, but this isn't pretty at all.
Regards,
Peter Jacobi