Re: Re: max_allowed_packet (was: Re: 4.0.x bug with LONGTEXT?)

2002-08-21 Thread Victoria Reznichenko
Roger, Tuesday, August 20, 2002, 5:34:25 PM, you wrote: RB Maybe... :) RB On the other hand: RB 1) The documentation on max_allowed_packet talks only about transferring RB data, not storing. (This should be easy to fix.) Agreed.. RB 2) The mere existence of LONGBLOB and LONGTEXT suggests

Re: max_allowed_packet (was: Re: 4.0.x bug with LONGTEXT?)

2002-08-21 Thread Roger Baklund
* Victoria Reznichenko RB 3) How can the server know that the max_allowed_packet for RB _this_ connection RB (the UPDATE'ing connection) isn't smaller than the RB max_allowed_packet value RB for a future SELECT connection? (I could do the UPDATE ... RB CONCAT(... with RB

RE: max_allowed_packet (was: Re: 4.0.x bug with LONGTEXT?)

2002-08-20 Thread Luc Foisy
-Original Message- From: Roger Baklund [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] * Harald Fuchs In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Victoria Reznichenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As you can see txt1 and txt2 contain text file ~ 8M UPDATE tbl1 SET total=CONCAT(txt1,txt2) WHERE id=1;

Re: max_allowed_packet (was: Re: 4.0.x bug with LONGTEXT?)

2002-08-20 Thread Roger Baklund
* Luc Foisy -Original Message- From: Roger Baklund [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] * Harald Fuchs In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Victoria Reznichenko [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: As you can see txt1 and txt2 contain text file ~ 8M UPDATE tbl1 SET total=CONCAT(txt1,txt2)