Re: position of VARCHAR in the table

>From: Ravi.Hubbly@crx.autozone.com (Ravi Hubbly) >Date: Tue, 10 Sep 1996 10:46:55 -0500 >X-Informix-List-Id: <list.11306> > >Hi, > >In other databases the position of VARCHAR in the table effects the table >size. If the VARCHAR data type is defined in between the other data >type fields then no benefit of space saving occurs. To get this >benifit the VARCHAR fields are to be specified as the last fields. Interesting. Please be specific -- which versions of which other databases have this odd restriction? >Is this true even in case of INFORMIX? No. If you have a dozen VARCHAR(255) columns scattered throughout a single table, and if every single one of them is NULL, then you use 2 dozen bytes to store the information (one byte for each field to record that the length is 1, and a second to record ASCII NUL '\\0' indicating a null field; note that this is different from the non-null, zero length string), not 11 * 255 + 2. The index entries for VARCHAR columns are variable sizes too, as far as I know. >If not then why is INFORMIX different from the other database? Because it is better engineered? Yours, Jonathan Leffler (johnl@informix.com) #include <disclaimer.h>