I changed the datatype in my MSSQL server to ntext (max size is around 1 GB) - myssql has an equivalent data type.
/jacob
----- Original Message ----- From: "Luke Noel-Storr" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Slide Users Mailing List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 10, 2005 6:20 PM
Subject: Re: max revision limit?
Hi,
I was just wondering if you'd made any progress with this?
I've come up against this problem again now we are using a database backed version of Slide again, and it would be great if a solution was in the pipeline.
It's certainly a design flaw as it is, and I can no longer make the fields in my database bigger (which just puts off the problem anyway) without changing them to blobs (which will also require a code change).
Cheers
Luke. -----
Carlos Villegas wrote:
Ok. I'll work on it. I'm quite busy at work but I'll make some time for this.
Carlos
James Mason wrote:
Carlos,
This seems valuable to me as well. Multivalue properties are a bit of a pain to work with right now.
-James
Warwick Burrows wrote:
Hi Carlos,
I definitely think its worth it. How were you thinking of indexing this
second table? The way to uniquely identify any individual property in the
property table seems to require 3 fields -- property namespace, property
name and version id? That would indicate that any table you create would
need all three of these as the primary key?
Warwick
-----Original Message-----
From: Carlos Villegas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 8:40 PM
To: Slide Users Mailing List
Subject: Re: max revision limit?
Warwick Burrows wrote:
Yes, but how much bigger? :-) It seems to be a flaw in the design that there is a version property that constantly grows in length with each new version added. Is this the way the spec defined the value of this property, or is this just Slide's implementation?
It seems to me it's a design flaw.
There are several properties that are a list of values like history and
group-member-set. I was thinking of adding a type identifier field to the
properties table and storing the individual values in a different table, one
per row. That's the usual relational db solution to this problem.
BTW, there's a property_type field in the properties table and the Java
object also has this field, but it doesn't seem to be used. Is it used at
all? If is not can we use it for this purpose?
I volunteer to try to fix at least one of the database stores using this
technique if anybody thinks it's worth it.
Carlos
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
