Already asked and answered
Oracle datatype: Should I use VARCHAR2 or CHAR
Just to avoid confusion about much wrong information. Here are some information about difference including performance
Reference: https://asktom.oracle.com/pls/asktom/f?p=100:11:0::::P11_QUESTION_ID:2668391900346844476
Since a char is nothing more than a VARCHAR2 that is blank padded out
to the maximum length - that is, the difference between the columns X
and Y below:
create table t ( x varchar2(30), y char(30) ); insert into t (x,y)
values ( rpad('a',' ',30), 'a' );
IS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, and given that the difference between columns X
and Y below:
insert into t (x,y) values ('a','a')
is that X consumes 3 bytes (null indicator, leading byte length, 1
byte for 'a') and Y consumes 32 bytes (null indicator, leading byte
length, 30 bytes for 'a ' )
Umm, varchar2 is going to be somewhat "at an advantage performance
wise". It helps us NOT AT ALL that char(30) is always 30 bytes - to
us, it is simply a varchar2 that is blank padded out to the maximum
length. It helps us in processing - ZERO, zilch, zippo.
Anytime you see anyone say "it is up to 50% faster", and that is it -
no example, no science, no facts, no story to back it up - just laugh
out loud at them and keep on moving along.
There are other "made up things" on that page as well, for example:
"Searching is faster in CHAR as all the strings are stored at a
specified position from the each other, the system doesnot have to
search for the end of string. Whereas in VARCHAR the system has to
first find the end of string and then go for searching."
FALSE: a char is just a varchar2 blank padded - we do not store
strings "at a specified position from each other". We do search for
the end of the string - we use a leading byte length to figure things
out.