Thanks David - great suggestion !
On 6/17/08, Jase Brandon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 6/17/08, David Durling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> Jase, >> >> Just an idea: If you really need that field represented in the table, >> you could create a smaller character field that holds a truncation of >> the 0 length field's value (using the LEFTC() function on a change in >> value in the 0 length field), and use the smaller field in the table - >> if it's worth the extra db space for you. >> >> By the way, I've also done something like that on the 6.0 mid tier to >> limit the amount of wrapping required in the results list, so 1 record won't >> hog the table due to having a lengthy short description. Don't know if >> that's still an issue with newer mid-tiers (& maybe there's a better way...) >> >> David Durling >> Univ. of Georgia >> >> >> Hello All, >>> We created a customization for ARS 7.1 patch 002 so we could "Email By >>> Site". >>> Without boring everyone to death with a superdiatribe, can anyone tell me >>> if my below suspicion is correct? >>> I have a zero length char field represented as a column on a table field, >>> everytime you try to view the record, remedy client locks up and dies. >>> "I think by design if you have a field that allows unlimited data in it, >>> you are not supposed to represent that field in a column on a table field. " >>> Correct? >>> Thanks in Advance, >>> Jase >>> >> >> -- >> David Durling 706-542-0223 >> Enterprise IT Services [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> University of Georgia >> >> >> _______________________________________________________________________________ >> UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org >> Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are" >> > > _______________________________________________________________________________ UNSUBSCRIBE or access ARSlist Archives at www.arslist.org Platinum Sponsor: www.rmsportal.com ARSlist: "Where the Answers Are"
