What's the difference between VARCHAR and CHAR? - sql

What's the difference between VARCHAR and CHAR in MySQL?
I am trying to store MD5 hashes.

VARCHAR is variable-length.
CHAR is fixed length.
If your content is a fixed size, you'll get better performance with CHAR.
See the MySQL page on CHAR and VARCHAR Types for a detailed explanation (be sure to also read the comments).

CHAR
Used to store character string value of fixed length.
The maximum no. of characters the data type can hold is 255 characters.
It's 50% faster than VARCHAR.
Uses static memory allocation.
VARCHAR
Used to store variable length alphanumeric data.
The maximum this data type can hold is up to
Pre-MySQL 5.0.3: 255 characters.
Post-MySQL 5.0.3: 65,535 characters shared for the row.
It's slower than CHAR.
Uses dynamic memory allocation.

CHAR Vs VARCHAR
CHAR is used for Fixed Length Size Variable
VARCHAR is used for Variable Length Size Variable.
E.g.
Create table temp
(City CHAR(10),
Street VARCHAR(10));
Insert into temp
values('Pune','Oxford');
select length(city), length(street) from temp;
Output will be
length(City) Length(street)
10 6
Conclusion: To use storage space efficiently must use VARCHAR Instead CHAR if variable length is variable

A CHAR(x) column can only have exactly x characters.
A VARCHAR(x) column can have up to x characters.
Since your MD5 hashes will always be the same size, you should probably use a CHAR.
However, you shouldn't be using MD5 in the first place; it has known weaknesses.
Use SHA2 instead.
If you're hashing passwords, you should use bcrypt.

What's the difference between VARCHAR and CHAR in MySQL?
To already given answers I would like to add that in OLTP systems or in systems with frequent updates consider using CHAR even for variable size columns because of possible VARCHAR column fragmentation during updates.
I am trying to store MD5 hashes.
MD5 hash is not the best choice if security really matters. However, if you will use any hash function, consider BINARY type for it instead (e.g. MD5 will produce 16-byte hash, so BINARY(16) would be enough instead of CHAR(32) for 32 characters representing hex digits. This would save more space and be performance effective.

Varchar cuts off trailing spaces if the entered characters is shorter than the declared length, while char will not. Char will pad spaces and will always be the length of the declared length. In terms of efficiency, varchar is more adept as it trims characters to allow more adjustment. However, if you know the exact length of char, char will execute with a bit more speed.

CHAR is fixed length and VARCHAR is variable length. CHAR always uses the same amount of storage space per entry, while VARCHAR only uses the amount necessary to store the actual text.

CHAR is a fixed length field; VARCHAR is a variable length field. If you are storing strings with a wildly variable length such as names, then use a VARCHAR, if the length is always the same, then use a CHAR because it is slightly more size-efficient, and also slightly faster.

In most RDBMSs today, they are synonyms. However for those systems that still have a distinction, a CHAR field is stored as a fixed-width column. If you define it as CHAR(10), then 10 characters are written to the table, where "padding" (typically spaces) is used to fill in any space that the data does not use up. For example, saving "bob" would be saved as ("bob"+7 spaces). A VARCHAR (variable character) column is meant to store data without wasting the extra space that a CHAR column does.
As always, Wikipedia speaks louder.

CHAR
CHAR is a fixed length string data type, so any remaining space in the field is padded with blanks.
CHAR takes up 1 byte per character. So, a CHAR(100) field (or variable) takes up 100 bytes on disk, regardless of the string it holds.
VARCHAR
VARCHAR is a variable length string data type, so it holds only the characters you assign to it.
VARCHAR takes up 1 byte per character, + 2 bytes to hold length information (For example, if you set a VARCHAR(100) data type = ‘Dhanika’, then it would take up 7 bytes (for D, H, A, N, I, K and A) plus 2 bytes, or 9 bytes in all.)

CHAR
Uses specific allocation of memory
Time efficient
VARCHAR
Uses dynamic allocation of memory
Memory efficient

The char is a fixed-length character data type, the varchar is a variable-length character data type.
Because char is a fixed-length data type, the storage size of the char value is equal to the maximum size for this column. Because varchar is a variable-length data type, the storage size of the varchar value is the actual length of the data entered, not the maximum size for this column.
You can use char when the data entries in a column are expected to be the same size.
You can use varchar when the data entries in a column are expected to vary considerably in size.

Distinguishing between the two is also good for an integrity aspect.
If you expect to store things that have a rule about their length such as yes or no then you can use char(1) to store Y or N. Also useful for things like currency codes, you can use char(3) to store things like USD, EUR or AUD.
Then varchar is better for things were there is no general rule about their length except for the limit. It's good for things like names or descriptions where there is a lot of variation of how long the values will be.
Then the text data type comes along and puts a spanner in the works (although it's generally just varchar with no defined upper limit).

according to High Performance MySQL book:
VARCHAR stores variable-length character strings and is the most common string data type. It can require less storage space than
fixed-length types, because it uses only as much space as it needs
(i.e., less space is used to store shorter values). The exception is a
MyISAM table created with ROW_FORMAT=FIXED, which uses a fixed amount
of space on disk for each row and can thus waste space. VARCHAR helps
performance because it saves space.
CHAR is fixed-length: MySQL always allocates enough space for the specified number of characters. When storing a CHAR value, MySQL
removes any trailing spaces. (This was also true of VARCHAR in MySQL
4.1 and older versions—CHAR and VAR CHAR were logically identical and differed only in storage format.) Values are padded with spaces as
needed for comparisons.

Char has a fixed length (supports 2000 characters), it is stand for character is a data type
Varchar has a variable length (supports 4000 characters)

Char or varchar- it is used to enter texual data where the length can be indicated in brackets
Eg- name char (20)

CHAR :
Supports both Character & Numbers.
Supports 2000 characters.
Fixed Length.
VARCHAR :
Supports both Character & Numbers.
Supports 4000 characters.
Variable Length.
any comments......!!!!

Related

PostgreSQL char varchar datatype search speed difference

I will create index for a column in PostgreSQL.
I wonder if there is a search speed difference between char and varchar datatype?
When you store a string as a char(n), extra spaces are added to pad it out to length n.
When you perform an operation on a char, extra logic is required to ignore any trailing spaces.
Aside from that, char is identical to varchar in Postgres.
So, if you are dealing with variable-length strings, use varchar. If your values are fixed-length, then there is not much difference, though a char column might make your database schema slightly easier to understand.
Note that char cannot tell the difference between literal spaces and padding characters, which leads to some odd behaviour (as required by the SQL standard). For example, the values ''::char(1) and ' '::char(1) are considered equal, which is probably not what you'd expect. So if in doubt, use varchar.
If you have variable-length values and you don't know the maximum size, you may want text instead. Storage and performance of text is exactly the same as varchar(n) (all string values are handled identically by TOAST), but text has no maximum length (other than the 1GB limit which applies to all types).

What is the major difference between Varchar2 and char

Creating Table:
CREATE TABLE test (
charcol CHAR(10),
varcharcol VARCHAR2(10));
SELECT LENGTH(charcol), LENGTH(varcharcol) FROM test;
Result:
LENGTH(CHARCOL) LENGTH(VARCHARCOL)
--------------- ------------------
10 1
Please Let me know what is the difference between Varchar2 and char?
At what times we use both?
Although there are already several answers correctly describing the behaviour of char, I think it needs to be said that you should not use it except in three specific situations:
You are building a fixed-length file or report, and assigning a non-null value to a char avoids the need to code an rpad() expression. For example, if firstname and lastname are both defined as char(20), then firstname||lastname is a shorter way of writing rpad(firstname,20)||rpad(lastname,20) to create
Chuck Norris
You need to distinguish between the explicit empty string '' and null. Normally they are the same thing in Oracle, but assigning '' to a char value will trigger its blank-padding behaviour while null will not, so if it's important to tell the difference, and I can't really think of a reason why it would be, then you have a way to do that.
Your code is ported from (or needs to be compatible with) some other system that requires blank-padding for legacy reasons. In that case you are stuck with it and you have my sympathy.
There is really no reason to use char just because some length is fixed (e.g. a Y/N flag or an ISO currency code such as 'USD'). It's not more efficient, it doesn't save space (there's no mythical length indicator for a varchar2, there's just a blank padding overhead for char), and it doesn't stop anyone entering shorter values. (If you enter 'ZZ' in your char(3) currency column, it will just get stored as 'ZZ '.) It's not even backward-compatible with some ancient version of Oracle that once relied on it, because there never was one.
And the contagion can spread, as (following best practice) you might anchor a variable declaration using something like sales.currency%type. Now your l_sale_currency variable is a stealth char which will get invisibly blank-padded for shorter values (or ''), opening the door to obscure bugs where l_sale_currency does not equal l_refund_currency even though you assigned 'ZZ' to both of them.
Some argue that char(n) (where n is some character length) indicates that values are expected to be n characters long, and this is a form of self-documentation. But surely if you are serious about a 3-character format (ISO-Alpha-3 country codes rather than ISO-Alpha-2, for example), wouldn't you define a constraint to enforce the rule, rather than letting developers glance at a char(3) datatype and draw their own conclusions?
CHAR was introduced in Oracle 6 for, I'm sure, ANSI compatibility reasons. Probably there are potential customers deciding which database product to purchase and ANSI compatibility is on their checklist (or used to be back then), and CHAR with blank-padding is defined in the ANSI standard, so Oracle needs to provide it. You are not supposed to actually use it.
Simple example to show the difference:
SELECT
'"'||CAST('abc' AS VARCHAR2(10))||'"',
'"'||CAST('abc' AS CHAR(10))||'"'
FROM dual;
'"'||CAST('ABC'ASVARCHAR2(10))||'"' '"'||CAST('ABC'ASCHAR(10))||'"'
----------------------------------- -------------------------------
"abc" "abc "
1 row selected.
The CHAR is usefull for expressions where the length of charaters is always fix, e.g. postal code for US states, for example CA, NY, FL, TX
Just to avoid confusion about much wrong information. Here are some information about difference including performance
Reference: https://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/f?p=100:11:0::::P11_QUESTION_ID:2668391900346844476
Since a char is nothing more than a VARCHAR2 that is blank padded out
to the maximum length - that is, the difference between the columns X
and Y below:
create table t ( x varchar2(30), y char(30) ); insert into t (x,y)
values ( rpad('a',' ',30), 'a' );
IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, and given that the difference between columns X
and Y below:
insert into t (x,y) values ('a','a')
is that X consumes 3 bytes (null indicator, leading byte length, 1
byte for 'a') and Y consumes 32 bytes (null indicator, leading byte
length, 30 bytes for 'a ' )
Umm, varchar2 is going to be somewhat "at an advantage performance
wise". It helps us NOT AT ALL that char(30) is always 30 bytes - to
us, it is simply a varchar2 that is blank padded out to the maximum
length. It helps us in processing - ZERO, zilch, zippo.
Anytime you see anyone say "it is up to 50% faster", and that is it -
no example, no science, no facts, no story to back it up - just laugh
out loud at them and keep on moving along.
There are other "made up things" on that page as well, for example:
"Searching is faster in CHAR as all the strings are stored at a
specified position from the each other, the system doesnot have to
search for the end of string. Whereas in VARCHAR the system has to
first find the end of string and then go for searching."
FALSE: a char is just a varchar2 blank padded - we do not store
strings "at a specified position from each other". We do search for
the end of the string - we use a leading byte length to figure things
out.
CHAR
CHAR should be used for storing fix length character strings. String values will be space/blank padded before stored on disk. If this type is used to store varibale length strings, it will waste a lot of disk space.
VARCHAR2
VARCHAR2 is used to store variable length character strings. The string value's length will be stored on disk with the value itself.
And
At what times we use both?
Its all depend upon your requirement.
CHAR type has fixed size, so if you say it is 10 bytes, then it always stores 10 bytes in the database and it doesn't matter whether you store any text or just empty 10 bytes
VARCHAR2 size depends on how many bytes you are actually going to store in the database. The number you specify is just the maximum number of bytes that can be stored (although 1 byte is minimum)
You should use CHAR when dealing with fixed length strings (you know in advance the exact length of string you will be storing) - database can then manipulate with it better and faster since it knows the exact lenght
You should use VARCHAR2 when you don't know the exact lenght of stored strings.
Situation you would use both may be:
name VARCHAR2(255),
zip_code CHAR(5) --if your users have only 5 place zip codes
When stored in a database, varchar2 uses only the allocated space. E.g. if you have a varchar2(1999) and put 50 bytes in the table, it will use 52 bytes.
But when stored in a database, char always uses the maximum length and is blank-padded. E.g. if you have char(1999) and put 50 bytes in the table, it will consume 2000 bytes.
CHAR is used for storing fix length character strings. It will waste a lot of disk space if this type is used to store varibale length strings.
VARCHAR2 is used to store variable length character strings.
At what times we use both?
This may vary and depend on your requirement.
EDIT:-
Lets understand this with an example, If you have an student name column with size 10; sname CHAR(10) and If a column value 'RAMA' is inserted, 6 empty spaces will be inserted to the right of the value. If this was a VARCHAR column; sname VARCHAR2(10). Then Varchar will take 4 spaces out of 10 possible and free the next 6 for other usage.

Using "power of two numbers" for length of database columns

I always try to use power of two numbers to define the length of my database columns, either VARCHAR or CHAR type.
Researching by Internet and debate with partners we do not achieve clarify anything about that, if it take advantaged of full clusters usage or something like that, so the question es simple:
Is it better use power of two numbers to define the length of the database VARCHAR and CHAR columns?
Is it better use power of two numbers to define the length of the database VARCHAR and CHAR columns?
No.
CHAR fields should be used for codes that take up the same number of characters. For example, CHAR(4) for a four character code column.
Since VARCHAR fields only use the number of characters needed, plus length bytes, you may set your VARCHAR fields to the maximum length for your database. For example VARCHAR(255) uses only one byte for the length, while VARCHAR(65535) will use two bytes.
Depending on which database system we're talking about, there might be a lower limit for VARCHAR than 65,535. There is also a limit to how long a row can be in bytes.

Difference between different string types in SQL Server?

What is the difference between char, nchar, ntext, nvarchar, text and varchar in SQL?
Is there really an application case for each of these types, or are some of them just deprecated?
text and ntext are deprecated, so lets omit them for a moment. For what is left, there are 3 dimensions:
Unicode (UCS-2) vs. non-unicode: N in front of the name denotes Unicode
Fixed length vs. variable length: var denotes variable, otherwise fixed
In-row vs. BLOB: (max) as length denotes a BLOB, otherwise is an in-row value
So with this, you can read any type's meaning:
CHAR(10): is an in-row fixed length non-Unicode of size 10
NVARCHAR(256): is an in-row variable length Unicode of size up-to 256
VARCHAR(MAX): is a BLOB variable length non-Unicode
The deprecated types text and ntext correspond to the new types varchar(max) and nvarchar(max) respectively.
When you go to details, the meaning of in-row vs. BLOB blurs for small lengths as the engine may optimize the storage and pull a BLOB in-row or push an in-row value into the 'small BLOB' allocation unit, but this is just an implementation detail. See Table and Index Organization.
From a programming point of view, all types: CHAR, VARCHAR, NCHAR, NVARCHAR, VARCHAR(MAX) and NVARCHAR(MAX), support an uniform string API: String Functions. The old, deprecated, types TEXT and NTEXT do not support this API, they have a separate, deperated, TEXT API to manipulate. You should not use the deprecated types.
BLOB types support efficient in-place updates by using the UPDATE table SET column.WRITE(#value, #offset) syntax.
The difference between fixed-length and variable length types vanishes when row-compression on a table. With row-compression enabled, fixed lenght types and variable length are stored in the same format and trailing spaces are not stored on disk, see Row Compression Implementation. Note that page-compression implies row-compression.
'n' represents support for unicode characters.
char - specifies string with fixed length storage. Space allocated with or without data present.
varchar - Varying length storage. Space is allocated as much as length of data in column.
text - To store huge data. The space allocated is 16 bytes for column storage.
Additionally - text and ntext have been deprecated for varchar(max) and nvarchar(max)
text and ntext are deprecated in favor of varchar(max) and nvarchar(max)
The n prefix simply means Unicode. They "n" types work similarly to the plain versions except they work with Unicode text.
char is a fixed length field. Thus char(10) filled with "Yes" will still take 10 bytes of storage.
varchar is a variable length field. char(10) filled with "Yes" will take 5 bytes of storage (there is a 2 byte overhead for using var data types).
char(n) holding string of length x. Storage = n bytes.
varchar(n) holding string of length x. Storage = x+2 bytes.
vchar and nvarchar are similar except it is 2 bytes per character.
Generally speaking you should only use char & char (over varchar & nvarchar) when working with fixed or semi-fixed strings. A good example would be a product_code or user_type which is always n characters long.
You shouldn't use text (or ntext) as it has been deprecated. varchar(max) & nvarchar(max) provides the same functionality.
N prefix indicates unicode support and takes up twice the bytes per character of non-unicode.
Varchar is variable length. You use an extra 2 bytes per field to store the length.
Char is fixed length. If you know how long your data will be, use char as you will save bytes!
Text is mostly deprecated in my experience.
Be wary of using Varchar(max) and NVarchar(max) as these fields cannot be indexed.
I only know between "char" and "varchar".
char: it can allocate memory of specified size whether or not it is filled
varchar: it will allocate memory based on the number of characters in it but it should have some size called maximum size.
Text is meant for very large amounts of text, and is in general not meant to be searchable (but can be in some circumstances. It will be slow anyway).
The char/nchar datatypes are of fixed lenghts, and are padded if entered stuff is shorter, as opposed to the varchar/nvarchar types, which are variable length.
The n types have unicode support, where the non-n types don't.
Text is deprecated.
Char is a set value. When you say char(10), you are reserving 10 characters for every single row, whether they are used or not. Use this for something that shouldn't change lengths (For example, Zip Code or SSN)
varchar is variable. When you say varchar(10), 2 bytes is set aside to store the size of the data, as well as the actual data (which might be only say, four bytes).
The N represents uni-code. Twice the space.
n-prefix: unicode.
var*: variable length, the rest is fixed length.
All data types are properly and nicely... documented.
Like here:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms187752.aspx
Is there really an application case
for each of these types, or are some
of them just deprecated?
No, there is a good case for ANY of them.

How much real storage is used with a varchar(100) declaration in mysql?

If I have a table with a field which is declared as accepting varchar(100) and then I actually insert the word "hello" how much real storage will be used on the mysql server? Also will an insert of NULL result in no storage being used even though varchar(100) is declared?
What ever the answer is, is it consistent accross different database implementations?
If I have a table with a field which
is declared as accepting varchar(100)
and then I actually insert the word
"hello" how much real storage will be
used on the mysql server?
Mysql will store 5 bytes plus one byte for the length. If the varchar is greater than 255, then it will store 2 bytes for the length.
Note that this is dependent on the charset of the column. If the charset is utf8, mysql will require up to 3 bytes per character. Some storage engines (i.e. memory) will always require the maximum byte length per character for the character set.
Also will an insert of NULL result in
no storage being used even though
varchar(100) is declared?
Making a column nullable means that mysql will have to set aside an extra byte per up to 8 nullable columns per row. This is called the "null mask".
What ever the answer is, is it consistent accross different database implementations?
It's not even consistent between storage engines within mysql!
It really depends on your table's charset.
In contrast to CHAR, VARCHAR values
are stored as a one-byte or two-byte
length prefix plus data. The length
prefix indicates the number of bytes
in the value. A column uses one length
byte if values require no more than
255 bytes, two length bytes if values
may require more than 255 bytes.
- source
UTF-8 often takes more space than an
encoding made for one or a few
languages. Latin letters with
diacritics and characters from other
alphabetic scripts typically take one
byte per character in the appropriate
multi-byte encoding but take two in
UTF-8. East Asian scripts generally
have two bytes per character in their
multi-byte encodings yet take three
bytes per character in UTF-8.
- source
varchar only stores what is used whereas char stores a set number of bytes.
Utf16 sometimes takes less data then utf8, for some rare languages, I don't know which ones.
Guys, is there an option to use COMPRESSed tables in MySql? Like in Apache. Thanks a lot