Subject Re: varchar fields and memory
Author mikcaau
Page 165 Transport accross the Network
with 1.5 VarChar data is (are ??) not padded,
sent is length and unpadded text


--- In, "kaczy27"
<akaczmarczyk@v...> wrote:
> Hi
> *dancing* got the book, got the book :)
> but back to the subject as the book raised me sharply when I read
> about string data types.
> I've always thought that defining the field as varchar is a way to
> avoid large memory consumption.
> I have a table that store text data, and although the data itself
> rarely exceed 50 characters I set it to be varchar (1024).
> The select often returns hundreds of records and so my question is:
> do I use 1 MB of client station memory to return 1000 records even
> if they contain on average 50 characters? or do I use 50 kB?
> Does server internally use 100 MB to perform grouping from 100.000
> records?
> That is quite important to me, I'd have to redesign entire database
> to acomodate blobs instead of varchars in such case.
> CUIN Kaczy