Danny Angus wrote: >>A better datatype would be CLOB, then you could have up to 2Gb character > > limit. > >>I don't believe this would require any application changes (moving to a > > CLOB). > > >>We've seen some odd behavior dealing with CLOBs with some drivers, hence > > the > >>useBlob vs useBytes attibute in sqlResources. Would that apply here? > > > IIRC there could be issues relating to the character encoding used in the > CLOB or the stream it is exposed as, mail is notorious in its ability to > mix encodings within a single message, a BLOB is more "raw" than a CLOB > which presupposes that it contains characters. This may explain our > historic choice of BLOB vs CLOB, or it may be wrong.
The use I was suggesting CLOB for was the storage for mail recipents which currently is a LONG VARCHAR, not the body of the message. Though I was surprised to see BLOB for mail body storage, I'd naively assumed it would be CLOB. For the reasons you give BLOB is probably the correct storage, from the javax.mail classes it seems that the body is transported as a set of bytes. Just FYI for Derby CLOBs, the character set is always Unicode and the stream is available through the standard ResultSet/Clob methods as a Java Reader or (not very useful) Ascii stream. Dan. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
