At 3:13 PM +1030 1/23/01, Monte Goulding wrote:
>I posted a question to this list asking about storage capacity of custom
>properties. Still interested by the way. I just have tested for double the
>capacity that I need and the property held 80,000 characters whithout even a
>whince. I have tested fields to 4,000,000,000 characters before which worked
>whilst bloating the file. unless someone tells me otherwise then I'll assume
>that CP's have the same bottomless nature.
>
>I just thought i'd let anyone know that hasn't tested this before that for
>some reason the way the data is stored in a CP is cheaper in terms of disk
>space than in a field. Here are the stats:
>
>Base file: 35 KB
>80,000 chars in a test field: over 250 KB
>the same 80,000 chars in a CP: 108 KB
I believer there is no practical limit to custom properties. They
live inside a theoretical limit along with everything else that if
memory serves is either two gigabytes or four.
I'd guess the difference is style information. Fields store the text
style, etc., while custom properties store only the actual data.
For your requirements, you should definitely go with custom
properties -- unless you plan to make changes and store them, and to
build this into a standalone. In that case it gets more complex,
because you can't save into a running application. The way to solve
this is to store the data in an external file. The file can either be
a text file you read in, or a stack that you open. Which is better
has been debated on this list several times, check the archive if
your curious. (my preference is a stack except for _very_ simple
purposes)
gc
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Info: http://www.xworlds.com/metacard/mailinglist.htm
Please send bug reports to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, not this list.
