Please start any new threads on our new
site at https://forums.sqlteam.com. We've got lots of great SQL Server
experts to answer whatever question you can come up with.
| Author |
Topic |
|
SQLDan9
Starting Member
10 Posts |
 Posted - 2002-07-10 : 15:48:46
|
| I know that the default value for the ODBC Long Text Option is 64K. However, with this value, our long texts that we insert into our database (SQL Server 2000/IIS/CF4.5) get truncated to 64999 characters (it gets inserted in a text type field). So to solve this, one would have to increase this value to double or triple the current value. But, by doing this, it brings a significant hit to the performance of the connection. My question is, how much of a significant hit are we talking about? |
|
|
robvolk
Most Valuable Yak
15732 Posts |
Posted - 2002-07-10 : 15:56:40
|
| There's no way to know without testing it with various settings. Factors such as packet size could have a side effect; it could be nice and fast with a large packet size if your network handles larger packets effectively, or it might choke if packets get dropped and need to be re-sent.If you have the ability to use OLE DB for your database access you will probably see a big improvement in performance, and ADO now has the Stream object for large streams of data. I don't know if Streams can work under the ODBC provider though. |
 |
|
|
SQLDan9
Starting Member
10 Posts |
Posted - 2002-07-11 : 10:15:19
|
| But by doubling this value, it should enable us to insert longer text in our database which contains a ntext field right?Saying this because this mornin' it was doubled but yet, everything gets truncated @ 64999... |
|
|
|
robvolk
Most Valuable Yak
15732 Posts |
Posted - 2002-07-11 : 10:31:57
|
Then it's most likely an internal limit of ODBC. You'd have to split up the value and do ungodly string manipulation in SQL Server to get it stored correctly.You are experiencing one of the reasons I RAN AWAY SCREAMING from ODBC the second OLE DB became available  Actually, this particular issue never came up, but PLENTY of others did that were just as aggravating. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ODBC Long Text Option