They are basically 1024 unicode chars tops. So keeping them in memory 
should be ok.

> Integer.MAXVALUE 
I'll try to use VARCHAR(1024); but

>  CLOB
> should be used for documents and texts with arbitrary size such as XML
> or HTML documents, text files, or memo fields of unlimited size.
> VARCHAR should be used for text with relatively short average size
> (for example shorter than 200 characters) 

On Friday, March 1, 2013 3:02:21 AM UTC+2, Kartweel wrote:
>
>  Side note: LOCK_MODE has no effect with MVCC.
>
> There is also a FOR UPDATE bug with LOBS in MVCC. My guess is these issues 
> won't get fixed unless you submit a patch as the devs are working on a new 
> storage backend which should solve all the issues.
>
> You could try BINARY? I think it stores the object in memory when you 
> query them? SO make sure you got enough memory to hold all your big 
> objects. Integer.MAXVALUE is 2GB of data if I'm not mistaken?. How big are 
> your BLOBS?
>
>
>
> On 1/03/2013 8:30 AM, Nick99 wrote:
>  
> Hello,
>
>  Any plans for the fix/workaround?  
>
>  I can only think of some pretty messy workarounds like moving my CLOB 
> fields to 
> a) just VARCHAR(*255*) /though the docs say *The maximum precision is 
> Integer.MAX_VALUE<http://www.h2database.com/html/datatypes.html#varchar_type>
> */ 
> b) or to BLOB (may behave the same way as CLOB) 
> c) or to BINARY (looks promising). 
>
>  
>
> On Tuesday, December 4, 2012 6:59:08 PM UTC+2, Nick99 wrote: 
>>
>> It seems the problem is with MVCC.
>>
>>  The test is not failing for 30s on my system 
>> with: "jdbc:h2:db/test01;MVCC=*FALSE*
>> ;MULTI_THREADED=0;LOCK_MODE=3;LOCK_TIMEOUT=20000;"
>>  
>>  All isolation levels fail for (in the 1-5s 
>> timeframe): "jdbc:h2:db/test01;MVCC=*TRUE;*
>> MULTI_THREADED=0;LOCK_MODE=3;LOCK_TIMEOUT=20000;" 
>> Connection.TRANSACTION_READ_UNCOMMITTED
>>  Connection.TRANSACTION_READ_COMMITTED
>>  Connection.TRANSACTION_REPEATABLE_READ
>>  Connection.TRANSACTION_SERIALIZABLE
>>
>> On Tuesday, December 4, 2012 11:01:37 AM U 
>> TC+2, Noel Grandin wrote: 
>>>
>>> Hmmm, I think what is happening here is that when in MVCC mode with 
>>> transaction isolation level TRANSACTION_READ_COMMITTED, the session is 
>>> somehow seeing LOB entries that have already been deleted. 
>>>
>>> Thomas, does that ring any bells? 
>>>
>>> I've been through the code paths that end up in LobStorage, but I can't 
>>> see any obvious problems. 
>>>
>>> On 2012-12-03 09:58, Noel Grandin wrote: 
>>> > Nice work on creating the test case! 
>>> > 
>>> > Interesting, this is a genuine bug somewhere in the LOB code, and it 
>>> > manifests even with MVCC=false. 
>>> > 
>>> > The only short-term fix I can see is to set your transaction isolation 
>>> > to  TRANSACTION_REPEATABLE_READ. 
>>> > 
>>> > Thomas, I further reduced the test-case, and I'm including it here. 
>>> > Note that (for me) it did not fail every single time. I normally let 
>>> > it run for about 15 seconds, and then terminate and try again. 
>>> > I get a failure rate of about 50%. 
>>> > 
>>>
>>>    -- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "H2 Database" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] <javascript:>.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected]<javascript:>
> .
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/h2-database?hl=en.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>  
>  
>
>
>  

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "H2 
Database" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/h2-database?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


Reply via email to