SQL Server Varchar MAX or Not?

I'm building a SQL Server table which will store a description field, complete with HTML markup.  This field can extend beyond 8000 characters so I was considering using the  VARCHAR(MAX) data type.  I run a very high traffic site and am concerned with performance.  Is it more efficient to combine the values (C# StringBuilder...) from two separate tables which contain VARCHAR(7500)?  
Phil5780Asked:
Who is Participating?
 
Aneesh RetnakaranConnect With a Mentor Database AdministratorCommented:
you can go ahead with varchar(max)
0
 
tigin44Commented:
you can use the varchar(max) without hesitating. Access time of the varchar(8000) and varchar(max) same. SQL server will not support text, ntext data types and microsoft recommends the use of varchar(max) instead of them. or the filestream datatype...
0
 
Aneesh RetnakaranDatabase AdministratorCommented:
string operations take lot of resources
0
Upgrade your Question Security!

Your question, your audience. Choose who sees your identity—and your question—with question security.

 
Phil5780Author Commented:
So you think VARCHAR(MAX) outperforms StringBuilding (.NET) two VARCHAR(7500)?
0
 
Aneesh RetnakaranDatabase AdministratorCommented:
yes, it willl
0
 
tigin44Commented:
sure that is
0
 
Miguel OzSoftware EngineerCommented:
I think you have to go for two tables, the limit of VARCHAR(MAX) is 8000 bytes.
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1761124/how-many-characters-in-varcharmax
0
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.