Subject | Re: [ib-support] Equivalent to TEXT field |
---|---|
Author | Paul Reeves |
Post date | 2001-10-04T13:54:14Z |
Darryl VanDorp wrote:
gone from Firebird. There is now support in the engine to automatically
convert strings to blobs when doing inserts and updates. I'm not sure if there
is a limit on how long the string can be. For instance, if a script is used
there might be a limitation in ISQL on statement length.
Of course, there is still the issue of extracting the data back out from a
blob. But that shouldn't be too difficult. Most middleware that I can think of
can read blobs.
The main reason I can think of for not going the VarChar route is that
Varchars are sent fully padded to their maximum size across the network. This
is a know problem and will hopefully be fixed sometime soon. In the meantime,
large varchars can cause a lot of traffic.
Neither field type can be indexed. You may want to look at this link
http://www.volny.cz/iprenosil/interbase/ for a fuller discussion of when and
how to choose between the two.
Paul
--
Paul Reeves
http://www.ibphoenix.com
taking InterBase further
>I'd say Blobs are the way to go. Much of the headache with using Blobs has
> List members,
>
> Postresql, mySQL, and SQL Sever all have a 'TEXT' field type.
> This type of field is bascially for free form text entry of
> undertermined length. What would the best
> equivalent for IB/Phoenix be? A large varchar? i.e. varchar(3200)?
> a bLOb SUB_TYPE TEXT?
>
> The "problem" i see with blobs is the extra
> work to insert them etc.
>
gone from Firebird. There is now support in the engine to automatically
convert strings to blobs when doing inserts and updates. I'm not sure if there
is a limit on how long the string can be. For instance, if a script is used
there might be a limitation in ISQL on statement length.
Of course, there is still the issue of extracting the data back out from a
blob. But that shouldn't be too difficult. Most middleware that I can think of
can read blobs.
The main reason I can think of for not going the VarChar route is that
Varchars are sent fully padded to their maximum size across the network. This
is a know problem and will hopefully be fixed sometime soon. In the meantime,
large varchars can cause a lot of traffic.
Neither field type can be indexed. You may want to look at this link
http://www.volny.cz/iprenosil/interbase/ for a fuller discussion of when and
how to choose between the two.
Paul
--
Paul Reeves
http://www.ibphoenix.com
taking InterBase further