Re: datatype for string

It helps, but that assumes that the LVARCHAR even allows more than one row to sit on a page without waste! Art Art S. Kagel Advanced DataTools (www.advancedatatools.com) Blog: http://informix-myview.blogspot.com/ Disclaimer: Please keep in mind that my own opinions are my own opinions and do not reflect on my employer, Advanced DataTools, the IIUG, nor any other organization with which I am associated either explicitly, implicitly, or by inference. Neither do those opinions reflect those of other individuals affiliated with any entity with which I am affiliated nor those of the entities themselves. On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 12:04 PM, Obnoxio The Clown <obnoxio@serendipita.com>wrote: > On 09/08/2011 16:58, Art Kagel wrote: > >> Personally I prefer using a sub-table of smallish CHAR columns to a >> large mostly empty LVARCHAR. That is most efficient in space and >> processing. The only time I would use a large LVARCHAR is when the vast >> majority of rows will have the column mostly filled but when there are a >> small but significant number of rows that have no content or very small >> content. Then I think it is justified. If the size of the actual >> content of the column varies widely, with most rows having partially >> full content, I would go the sub-table route. >> > > What's wrong with MAX_FILL_DATA_PAGES? > > -- > Cheers, > Obnoxio The Clown > > http://obotheclown.blogspot.**com <http://obotheclown.blogspot.com>; > I will now proceed to pleasure myself with this fish. >