r> Hi,

>> IMHO, I think that we should make Firebird BLOBs
>> behave as BINARY data types. Most applications that
>> use JDBC expect a LONGVARBINARY type (not a BLOB),
>> and a JDBC implementation that does not provide
>> an implementation for LONGVARBINARY will surely
>> have troubles with them.

r> As I wrote in previous reply, my idea is:

r> - if the subtype of the BLOB field is >= 0 - this is LONGVARBINARY;
r> - if the subtype of the BLOB field is < 0 - this is BLOB.

Perfect. I'll check this subtype 2 issue. Please tell me if I can
help. One remark: to make Blob useful, the full JDBC3.0 Blob interface
should be implemented, am I right that currently only JDBC2.0 API is
found in FBBlobField?