VARCHAR vs. NVARCHAR in Standard SQL: Understanding Character Encoding Differences

In SQLite

Things are a bit simpler with SQLite:

• SQLite's TEXT datatype: Internally, SQLite uses a single, unified TEXT datatype for storing all text data, regardless of whether you declare it as VARCHAR or NVARCHAR. This means there's no practical difference between them in terms of character encoding or storage efficiency.

Why are VARCHAR and NVARCHAR still available in SQLite?

• Compatibility: Even though SQLite treats them the same internally, using these keywords can improve compatibility with tools or code that expect these data types in SQL schema definitions. These tools might interpret the schema and generate code accordingly.
• Future-proofing: While SQLite currently uses TEXT for everything, there's a slight chance that future versions might introduce more specific text datatypes. Using these keywords can make your code more adaptable if that happens.

Key Points

• In standard SQL, use NVARCHAR for storing text that might include characters outside the basic Latin set.
• In SQLite, VARCHAR and NVARCHAR have no practical difference in terms of functionality. You can use either for convenience or compatibility.
• Consider using TEXT for simplicity in SQLite.

Choosing the Right Datatype

• If you know your data will only contain ASCII characters and storage efficiency is a concern, VARCHAR might be a good choice in standard SQL.
• If you need to support a wider range of characters, use NVARCHAR.
• In SQLite, TEXT is a safe and versatile option.

Example Codes (Standard SQL vs. SQLite)

Here's an example showing the difference between VARCHAR and NVARCHAR in standard SQL (like MySQL):

-- Table with VARCHAR (suitable for basic Latin characters)
CREATE TABLE customers (
  id INT PRIMARY KEY,
  name VARCHAR(50) NOT NULL
);

-- Table with NVARCHAR (suitable for multilingual characters)
CREATE TABLE products (
  id INT PRIMARY KEY,
  name NVARCHAR(100) NOT NULL
);

SQLite

While VARCHAR and NVARCHAR are technically available in SQLite, they both map to the same TEXT datatype internally. Here's an example:

-- Table using TEXT datatype (SQLite)
CREATE TABLE articles (
  id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY,
  title TEXT NOT NULL,
  content TEXT
);

• Pros: Simple, portable, good for human-readable data (e.g., configuration files).
• Cons: Not ideal for large datasets, inefficient for frequent updates, limited querying capabilities.
• Example: Save data in plain text, CSV (Comma-Separated Values), JSON, or YAML format.

Key-Value Stores:

• Pros: Fast for simple lookups, scalable for large datasets.
• Cons: Not designed for complex queries, data retrieval might require iterating through keys.
• Example: Use libraries/databases like Redis, Memcached, or LevelDB (depending on your programming language).

Document Databases:

• Pros: Flexible schema, easy to store and query semi-structured data (e.g., JSON, XML).
• Cons: Might have performance overhead compared to relational databases for simple queries.
• Example: Use databases like MongoDB, Couchbase, or Firebase Firestore.

In-Memory Databases:

• Pros: Extremely fast for read/write operations as data resides in RAM.
• Cons: Volatile (data lost on program termination), not suitable for long-term storage.
• Example: Use libraries like Apache Ignite or Hazelcast depending on your programming language.

Consider these factors when selecting an alternative method:

• Data size and complexity: Flat files work well for small datasets, while key-value stores are better for large volumes. Document databases excel with semi-structured data.
• Performance requirements: In-memory databases offer the fastest access speeds, but lack persistence.
• Querying needs: Relational databases like SQLite excel at complex queries, while key-value stores are better for basic lookups.
• Persistence requirements: If data needs to persist beyond program execution, choose methods like SQLite or document databases.