Out of them, character data types get a more prominent place as they are used to store a lot of information compared to numbers. Character data types are used for storing characters or alphanumeric data in strings. The type of database character set is defined when creating the database.
This article explains what these two data types, char and varchar, are and the difference between them. The ISO definition of char is a character and the char data type is used to store a character.
Char n can store n fixed size of characters. The maximum number of characters that a char n can hold is chars and a string length must be a value from 1 to Char is fifty percent faster than varchar and, therefore, we can get a better performance when we work with char. Char uses static memory allocation when storing data. When we want to store strings with a known fixed length, it is better to use the char. As the name suggests, varchar is called a variable character. Varchar is used to store alphanumeric data that have variable lengths.
The maximum number of characters that this data type can hold is characters and the maximum storage size is 2 GB. The storage size of varchar is the actual length of the data plus two bytes. Varchar is slower than char and it uses dynamic memory allocation when storing data. We can use varchar when storing data such as names, addresses, descriptions, etc. This is because the fixed-length row of data is not prone to fragmentation. But varchar will occupy the space based on the data that is inserted and also it will occupy 1 or 2 bytes as the length prefix.
Char and varchar are the most highly used character data type available in databases. Char is used to store a string with a fixed length while varchar is used to store strings that have a varying length.
In order to get a better performance from the data, it is more important to choose the correct data types for the fields of the tables in your database. It is more convenient to use the smallest data types that can correctly store the data, because they take less space from the memory.
Coming from Engineering cum Human Resource Development background, has over 10 years experience in content developmet and management. Leave a Reply Cancel reply.If the length of string is less than set or fixed length then it is padded with extra blank spaces so that its length became equal to the set length.
Storage size of CHAR datatype is of n bytes set length. We should use this datatype when we expect the data values in a column are of same length. If the length of string is less than set or fixed length then it will store as it is without padded with extra blank spaces.
We should use this datatype when we expect the data values in a column are of variable length. Attention reader! If you like GeeksforGeeks and would like to contribute, you can also write an article using contribute. See your article appearing on the GeeksforGeeks main page and help other Geeks. Please Improve this article if you find anything incorrect by clicking on the "Improve Article" button below.
Varying is an alias for varchar, so no difference, see documentation :. The notations varchar n and char n are aliases for character varying n and character nrespectively. If character varying is used without length specifier, the type accepts strings of any size. The latter is a PostgreSQL extension.
They are two different names for the same type. Both are the same thing but many of the databases are not providing the varying char mainly postgreSQL is providing.
Learn more. Ask Question. Asked 11 years, 2 months ago. Active 2 months ago. Viewed 95k times. Active Oldest Votes. Varying is an alias for varchar, so no difference, see documentation : The notations varchar n and char n are aliases for character varying n and character nrespectively. Charles Ma Charles Ma It's the other way round: varchar is an alias for varying.
Stack Overflow for Teams is a private, secure spot for you and your coworkers to find and share information. For instance, if I store "Foo" in Char it will take up bytes in my field. Learn more. Asked 5 years, 11 months ago. Active 5 years, 11 months ago. Viewed 1k times. Daniel Daniel It all depends on your data. Anything else and longer - use varchar. I mean JNevill: if you have a longer string that's always that given length - OK, store is as Char n.
But I wouldn't store a normal first name as char 25 - and waste lots of space on shorter first names in the process OK That's what I thought. I wanted to make sure I wasn't missing anything. I was thinking, perhaps, at a certain string length the extra overhead of the two bytes to store the length would be a small enough percentage of the whole that it wouldn't matter. Active Oldest Votes. JNevill JNevill There is also the performance overhead, where some RDBMS will store variable length data off-row, which may be in a different page.
Can you expand the performance overhead issue? The Overflow Blog. Podcast Ben answers his first question on Stack Overflow. The Overflow Bugs vs. Featured on Meta. Responding to the Lavender Letter and commitments moving forward.
On the other hand, a Varchar takes a variable space, which means that it will take only that much space as the actual value entered in as the data for Varchar datatype.
These additional bytes are used for holding information about the length. Both are also used similarly in order to introduce an item. It is always preferred to use char when the data entered in a column is likely to be of the same size as is expected to be entered.
Char should be used when the length of the variable is known, whereas Varchar should be used only when the length is unknown. Char is faster than Varchar, as Varchar system spends some time for detecting the time for finding out the end of the string. On the other hand, this time is not wasted in Char. Difference between Char and Varchar.
Key Difference: In database systems like SQL Server, Char and Varchar are both datatypes, where char actually refers to character and Varchar refers to variable character. They both are used to store string type of values with a maximum length of 8, characters. The storage size of char is the same as declared whereas the stage sixe of Varchar depends upon the bytes of the actual data entered. Used for storing data like Address data entries vary largely Condition: input string less than declared bytes The space without any character will be padded with space characters The space without any character will not be padded with any of the characters Condition: input string more than declared bytes The string will be truncated to declared bytes The string will be truncated to declared bytes.
Image Courtesy: functionx. Add new comment Your name. Plain text. This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions. Used for storing data like Phone number, etc. The space without any character will be padded with space characters.
Stack Overflow for Teams is a private, secure spot for you and your coworkers to find and share information. Is there any performance difference between varchar 1 and char 1? The difference will be negligible in most cases. Concentrate your performance oriented design efforts in places where it will make a real difference, like table composition and index design.
It helps to divide the design effort into two layers: logical design and physical design. Most of the performance oriented effort is in the second stage, physical design. However, if you're data isn't a constant length and you're thinking of space considerations, it would make sense to use VARCHAR because CHAR will always use a byte for every bit of the declared length whether there is anything in that space. In the end, though, it probably doesn't make that big of a difference as the amount of data involved is quite small.
Learn more. Asked 10 years, 2 months ago. Active 21 days ago. Viewed 16k times. Active Oldest Votes. In logical design, flexibility trumps performance.Difference between char,nchar,varchar,nvarchar in SqlServer
Except when it doesn't. Walter Mitty Walter Mitty Flexibility should almost never trump performance! I guarantee the user wants performacne over flexibility even when they say they want flexibility.
Perhaps not: nikoport. If using fixed length then CHAR is always more efficient by two bytes. Ardent Coder 3, 9 9 gold badges 18 18 silver badges 39 39 bronze badges.
Awk Sod Awk Sod 1 1 silver badge 2 2 bronze badges. Anddo Anddo 1, 6 6 silver badges 27 27 bronze badges. Is not true for drivers. NET drivers differ both. As far as Oracle is concerned In practice you shouldn't see a difference performance wise for a one character column. Gary Myers Gary Myers The varchar will still have to store at least a byte for the length of the string, though, so you can never have less than 1 byte.Even so, I find it to be an interesting query to this day.
Because various Db2 developments - some relatively recent and some from way back - have caused the answer to change over time. You can read on and see if you agree with me. Now, it is of course true that in at least one case the question has a very simple answer: if a value to be stored in the column can exceed byes in length, CHAR cannot be the data type because bytes is the maximum length you can specify for a fixed-length Db2 character string column.
Subscribe to RSS
Suppose that the maximum length of a character string value that will be stored in a table is "only" 20, bytes, but the column will very rarely be referenced in a query's select-list and maybe never or almost never referenced in a query predicate.
In that case, CLOB could be a good choice for the column's data type. The LOB table space could should be assigned to a buffer pool other than the one used for the base table's table space, and THAT would allow a lot more of the base table's pages sans the LOB values to be cached in a given amount of buffer pool space.
You'd also have more rows in each base table page.
Difference Between Char and Varchar
Here again, the best choice is often pretty clear, owing to the two bytes of "baggage" that come along with a variable-length character column. These days, it could be a length indicator, or it could be an offset indicator. It will be one or the other depending on whether basic row format is used for the table's table space or partition in which case it will be a length indicator or reordered row format is in effect in which case it is an offset indicator. I'll have more to say about basic versus reordered row format in a moment, but either way you're looking at two extra bytes for a varying-length value.
Because of those two extra bytes, going with VARCHAR for a column that will hold hold values with a maximum length of one or two bytes does not make the best use of disk or buffer pool space - for optimal efficiency you should use CHAR 1 or CHAR 2 for a column that will hold values that will be, respectively, one byte or not more than two bytes in length. What might influence your decision?
CHAR vs VARCHAR in SQL
Here are some thoughts:. Post a Comment.
Here are some thoughts: What is the variability in length of values that will go in the table column? How important is it to make access to the data values in a column absolutely as efficient as possible? How does reordered row format do that? It does that by physically storing variable-length columns at the end of a table's rows logical column order is not affected by reordered versus basic row format and preceding those variable-length columns with a series of 2-byte offset indicators - one for each variable-length column.
The offset indicator for a given variable-length column shows where in the row the first byte of that column can be found. This is good for performance because to access a value in a variable-length column, Db2 goes straight to that column's offset indicator easily done, because Db2 knows which of those 2-byte indicators it is going to, and the offset indicators are preceded by whatever fixed-length columns are in the row.
Having gotten efficiently to the right offset indicator, Db2 sees exactly where to go to get to the variable-length column's first byte - boom-boom, done. Contrast that with the basic row format BRF situation, in which physical column order is the same as logical order in a row. Now, does RRF make access to variable-length columns just as efficient as access to fixed length columns? Not quite, but RRF does reduce the access-efficiency gap between fixed-length and variable-length columns.