Subject | Re: [firebird-support] Re: What are the trade-offs of CHAR vs. VARCHAR? |
---|---|
Author | Dimitry Sibiryakov |
Post date | 2019-11-13T16:55:20Z |
13.11.2019 17:37, blackfalconsoftware@... [firebird-support] wrote:
I recommend you to read Interbase API Guide and Developers Guide in part of "Data
Types" to understand how data types are represented internally.
--
WBR, SD.
> Your statement is suggesting a null length (until the field is updated) with two bytes forNothing you said make sense. There nothing like "initial storage-info".
> an actual length, which is how VARCHAR fields work in all other databases to my
> knowledge. Otherwise, to follow the previous statement, a Firebird table could have a
> VARCHAR field for 1000 characters, be stored as such with the initial storage-info bytes
> holding the actual length, which would be 1000. When the field is updated to lets say 20
> characters of data, the field would still have an actual size of 1000 characters but the
> storage-info would be 20.
>
> How does this make any sense?
I recommend you to read Interbase API Guide and Developers Guide in part of "Data
Types" to understand how data types are represented internally.
--
WBR, SD.