Question on that 32k limit, and this might be a dumb one, but have you adjusted the itembuffersize? I'm just not sure if that has anything to do with inserts as it does with selects. Also, have you tested for this problem on 5.5? Is upgrading an option?
I hope everyone knows that 5.5 is for the most part a stabilized service and 6.0 is now coming into focus. I'm not saying that support for 5.5 will end tomorrow or even this year, but anyone still on 5.0 has a number of compelling reasons to upgrade now. I'm 100% 5.5 with my clients now and it is noticeably better. Robert -----Original Message----- From: William M Conlon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, January 13, 2006 2:46 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Witango-Talk: replicated database servers Thanks for the detailed explanation. Well thought out and thorough. Can I ask whether you've been successful storing your images as BLOBs with a DirectDBMS? My witango 5 crashes if I try to insert using <@BIND> with an image larger than 32k, so I am sticking with the Insert/Update actions. I can live with that, but I've wanted to steamline my applications to eliminate the problematic and memory consuming DataDictionary stanzas required for the Update/Insert/ Search actions. thx. On Jan 13, 2006, at 11:25 AM, Robert Garcia wrote: > This works with DirectDBMS actions and regular search actions. ________________________________________________________________________ TO UNSUBSCRIBE: Go to http://www.witango.com/developer/maillist.taf ________________________________________________________________________ TO UNSUBSCRIBE: Go to http://www.witango.com/developer/maillist.taf
