[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-5235?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13034795#comment-13034795
]
Kathey Marsden commented on DERBY-5235:
---------------------------------------
A couple of random questions/comments on this.
- Does the sql spec say anything about limits on these types?
- What would be the soft upgrade behavior?
- I think there may be more complications regarding implementing this for
client/server than embedded. It may be less onerous now than at the time I
looked at it years ago, because at the time I was working with the JCC client
and strict adherence to DRDA. I think it will be important to keep the limits
the same for both client and server.
- How would older clients behave with larger columns?
> Remove the artificial limit on the length of VARCHAR values, allowing them to
> be java.lang.Integer.MAX_VALUE long
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: DERBY-5235
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/DERBY-5235
> Project: Derby
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: SQL
> Affects Versions: 10.9.0.0
> Reporter: Rick Hillegas
>
> The original Cloudscape limit for the length of VARCHAR values was
> java.lang.Integer.MAX_VALUE. That is the limit in Cloudscape 5.1. Nothing in
> Derby should break if we restore the original limit. The current limit is an
> artificial bound introduced to make Derby agree with DB2. 32672 is the upper
> bound on the length of a DB2 VARCHAR:
> http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/db2luw/v8/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.db2.udb.doc/admin/r0001029.htm
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
