Received: from mermaid.shore.net (mermaid.shore.net [207.244.124.6]) by hub.org (8.9.2/8.9.1) with ESMTP id GAA69655 for ; Mon, 29 Mar 1999 06:09:39 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from ari@shore.net) Received: from pm4-2-129.port.shore.net ([192.168.1.2]) [207.244.111.129] by mermaid.shore.net with esmtp (Exim) for pgsql-interfaces@postgreSQL.org id 10RZvE-00007P-00; Mon, 29 Mar 1999 06:09:36 -0500 X-Sender: ari@shell1.shore.net Message-Id: In-Reply-To: <19990328223910.A4338@ricochet.net> References: <36FF1CC9.3DE5BE66@flex.ro>; from Constantin Teodorescu on Mon, Mar 29, 1999 at 06:25:13AM +0000 <199903290210.LAA00030@kmail.com> <36FF1CC9.3DE5BE66@flex.ro> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Mon, 29 Mar 1999 06:09:20 -0500 To: PostgreSQL Interfaces From: Ari Halberstadt Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Re: I am facing a difficult problem.. I asked recently about a similar problem. PosgreSQL limits rows to 8191 bytes. A solution is to split the data into segments. My application is a bulletin board and messages can be pretty long. The data are split into separate rows and are broken on word boundaries to keep the split clean (and facilitate full-text searching if it were hosted with, say, Oracle 8i). Notice that you are also limited by query length. The code (in Java) for doing the split turned out to be a bit involved. >On Mon, Mar 29, 1999 at 06:25:13AM +0000, Constantin Teodorescu wrote: > It would depend upon your database. I'm handling a bug database >with some rather large text fields. If someone pastes 8k of text into >one of them, the INSERT statement will fail for that reason. > I would like to know if there is a simple solution to this as well, >or if it will be addressed in the future. I do have other options, but >they entail shuffling a lot of legacy data around. -- Ari Halberstadt mailto:ari@shore.net PGP public key available at