| Subject | Storing binary data into a BLOB SUB_TYPE TEXT field |
|---|---|
| Author | Nando |
| Post date | 2012-04-03T01:01:23Z |
Hello,
I've an old Firebird 1.5 database that has in one of its tables a field defined like this:
...
myfield BLOB SUB_TYPE TEXT SEGMENT SIZE 512,
...
The database has grown so much (about 34 Gb size) that any maintenance task has become a big trouble. The proposed workaround is to compress the text data from the blob field keeping the same field with the compressed data.
The questions are:
- Is it ok to store binary data into a BLOB SUB_TYPE TEXT FIELD that is usually used for storing only text?
- Is there some risk of loosing data when retrieving the binary data from this type of field?
I'll apreciate your comments.
Nando.
I've an old Firebird 1.5 database that has in one of its tables a field defined like this:
...
myfield BLOB SUB_TYPE TEXT SEGMENT SIZE 512,
...
The database has grown so much (about 34 Gb size) that any maintenance task has become a big trouble. The proposed workaround is to compress the text data from the blob field keeping the same field with the compressed data.
The questions are:
- Is it ok to store binary data into a BLOB SUB_TYPE TEXT FIELD that is usually used for storing only text?
- Is there some risk of loosing data when retrieving the binary data from this type of field?
I'll apreciate your comments.
Nando.