I have found that including BLOB fields in a table that also contains CHAR
fields, the CHAR fields will be forced into VARCHAR fields. What I do is put
BLOBs into thier own table with a link identifier like so:
Table_1
id(bigint), blob_size(medint), blob_id(bigint)
Table_2
blob_id(bigint), blob_data(medblob)
and:
SELECT blob_size, blob_data FROM Table_1, Table_2 WHERE Table_1.id = ?? AND
Table_2.blob_id = Table_1.blob_id LIMIT 1
should give you the blob_size and blob_data where the blob_id's match...
Norman
--
Avatar hosting at
www.easyavatar.com
"Mathieu Pagé" <ma**************@GoogleEmailSystem.com> wrote in message
news:OV********************@wagner.videotron.net.. .
Ike wrote: I have blob fields in some tables - never more than one field in any
table, and never where a blob can be > 64k. I have inherited the code for this
project from someone else, and was considering investing considerable
effort in this case to move the blobs over to a separate table altogether.
I am wondering if it is worth it however. Is it disasterous to have a
single blob field (which frequently is merely null) in a table. I have three
tables that can have a single blob in them. Am I decieving myself thinking I
can allow this to be the architecture? Please give me your advice, Ike
I'm also looking for how to do this.
MP.