Subject | Re: [IB-Architect] Database names: Hair trigger |
---|---|
Author | Jim Starkey |
Post date | 2000-05-05T19:34Z |
At 12:27 PM 5/5/00 -0700, Bill Karwin wrote:
that a character string length is a short is pretty pervasive,
but sure would be nice to phase out the idea that strings are
< 65K.
Jim Starkey
>Maybe we could ditch the restriction? I suspect that the idea
>> Rather than a cast, why not just treat a blob as a character
>> string?
>
>Given that there is a length limit on DSQL strings that is much shorter than
>the maximum Blob length, this would be like offering a new arithmetic
>operation for integers, but only if the integer is between 0 and 350. Very
>convenient if the integer you need is in that range, but a bit inexplicable
>why there is the limitation.
>
that a character string length is a short is pretty pervasive,
but sure would be nice to phase out the idea that strings are
< 65K.
Jim Starkey