Sorry, forgot to replay all.
> Emi Lu wrote:
>
>> May I know does varchar(128) and varchar(32) will cause any size or
>> efficiency differences?
>
> None at all.
Basically, there is no efficiency differences at all, if I know a column
is now varchar(32) but could be potentially increased to length(col)>32
in the future, I will setup to varchar(128).
This column will be setup as varchar(128) everywhere so that foreign key
constraints will work.
I had thought "foreign constraint, query or indexes" on varchar(32)
could be more efficient than varchar(128) and I was wrong.
I will use varchar(128) for my column.
Thanks a lot!
