What are the recommended database column sizes for names? [closed]

Answer 1

I am not sure about length but if you are going to be internationalizing then definitely go with nvarchar as this will support any "extended" ASCII characters you may encounter. The other good part about nvarchar is that it has a fixed max length but does not pad values out to that length.

In other words my name would be stored as

'Andrew'

in an nvarchar(20) field but would be stored as

'Andrew              '

in a char(20) field. So with this in mind I would shoot for a large number for names with the thought being that you will not be wasting that extra space using nvarchar.

Answer 2

You need 590 characters combined if you want to support the world's longest name.

Answer 3

Personally I think it boils down to how much data you reasonably expect to have to store. Even if you're going to have a million names, it probably wouldn't hurt to use a char(64) or bigger for each name. If size is an issue, you can start with 32 and bump up the size with alter column, though keep in mind that this is an expensive operation for large tables.

Answer 4

ISO has not issued standards for naming of humans (yet), though I hear a preliminary draft is being passed around at the very highest levels.

:)

Seriously, 64 or so should be adequate for 99.99% of first and last names -- in any language. I've never seen anything other than one char for an MI (though you're right, many folks have more than one).

BTW: Unless I'm mistaken, email addresses -- technically -- can be up to 320 characters in length and can contain ! # $ % & ' * + - / = ? ^ _ ` { | } ~ and . provided that . is not the first nor last character, nor may it appear two or more times consecutively.

PS. My pet rabbit's name is "His Imperial Majesty Theopolops Bunny Galore". Needless to say this was truncated in the vet's database. I think they have it as "His Imperial Maj". So it goes.