Re: The need to 'get around' the 4000 character limit in varchar2

From: Thomas Kellerer <TAAXADSCBIXW_at_spammotel.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 15:47:26 +0100
Message-ID: <4roqf2Fro568U1@mid.individual.net>

hpuxrac wrote on 12.11.2006 00:57:
> Thomas Kellerer wrote:

>> hpuxrac wrote on 11.11.2006 01:47:
>>>>> Tx!
>>>> Move it to a CLOB.
>>> You are missing the other previous relevant answers and exchanges in
>>> this thead.
>>  > Wonder how many people already suggested that one.
>>
>> Because moving to CLOB is the only sensible solution.

>
> I wonder what my first suggestion was in this thread.
>
> Why don't you read it from the beginning?

I did read it. But your solution is still a workaround (and an ugly one as well in my opinion). I don't think using multiple varchar2 columns require less code changes in the application that switching from varchar2 to CLOB (as the OP has indicated).

Switching back to the limit of 4000 does not even seem to be a solution to me, as the requirement is obviously to store more characters than that. But if the reality shows, that no more than 4000 are indeed used (even in SQL Server) then, yes I agree with you

Thomas Received on Sun Nov 12 2006 - 08:47:26 CST