nvarchar vs char

[Berny]

Can anyone tell me if there is any benefit in using nvarchar over char or
vise versa?

 

[Steve Jorgensen]

Can anyone tell me if there is any benefit in using nvarchar over char or
vise versa?

varchar gives you a string of single-byte characters using the current
character set. nvarchar gives you a string of 2-byte UNICODE characters
such that any character in the string can be practically any character from
any language.

 

[Van T. Dinh]

See Microsoft SQL Server Books-On-line topic "Character
Data".

If you don't need Unicode, don't use nchar or nvarchar.

HTH
Van T. Dinh
MVP (Access)

 

[Steve Jorgensen]

See Microsoft SQL Server Books-On-line topic "Character
Data".

If you don't need Unicode, don't use nchar or nvarchar.

I would mostly agree with that, but not totally. You have to weigh the
cost of the extra space vs the demand on the app and the likelihood that it
will need to handle foreigh-language text in its lifetime. Remember that
the world is getting smaller, and the lifespan of an application may be
longer than you planned. Remember the Y2K problem?

 

[Van T. Dinh]

OTOH, I can always change the Field types to nvarchar if and when need it.

I think for normal business transactions, even for international
transaction, most names and addresses are Anglicised anyway. I should say
that somehow, my databases are mostly for manufacturing so Unicode is
definite not something I need.

I want all of my databases obsolete in 10 years so that I have an excuse to
retire a little bit early!

Talking about life span of application, a poster was asking whether she
could have 5-digit year in Access! It sounds like she was planning for an
application that will last 8,000 years or more???

Y2K problem? Not for IT people. A lot of IT people got very rich during
that time <g>.

 

[student3hw4f]

ja!

See Microsoft SQL Server Books-On-line topic "Character
Data".

If you don't need Unicode, don't use nchar or nvarchar.

HTH
Van T. Dinh
MVP (Access)