 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
SQL Server Forum / Other Technologies / Full-Text Search / October 2006Text or VarChar fields
I have a table that has some VarChar(8000) fields in it. I have run into problems with records having more than 4000 chars in each of the fields which gives me an error saying that the record size too large ( > 8060). It is going to be a problem trying to set up some type of multiple record mechanism to solve this problem. I was thinking of just changing the VarChars to Text Fields. Will this be a problem with Full Text Search? I thought someone said that you couldn't use Text fields with it (but could be wrong here). Is there a drawback changing to Text? Thanks, Tom You can use SQL FTS with text fields. There are some problems with text fields with replication, and they require their own methods to insert them.  SignatureHilary Cotter Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence. This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's positions, strategies or opinions. Looking for a SQL Server replication book? http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS http://www.indexserverfaq.com >I have a table that has some VarChar(8000) fields in it. > [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Tom Does it make a difference whether I have the Text field in row or not? Thanks, Tom > You can use SQL FTS with text fields. There are some problems with text > fields with replication, and they require their own methods to insert them. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > > > > Tom In general, if the bulk of your data is below the threshold where it goes in row, yes. Otherwise there isn't much of an improvement. SignatureHilary Cotter Director of Text Mining and Database Strategy RelevantNOISE.Com - Dedicated to mining blogs for business intelligence. This posting is my own and doesn't necessarily represent RelevantNoise's positions, strategies or opinions. Looking for a SQL Server replication book? http://www.nwsu.com/0974973602.html Looking for a FAQ on Indexing Services/SQL FTS http://www.indexserverfaq.com > Does it make a difference whether I have the Text field in row or not? > [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >> > >> > Tom I assume that that the Full Text engine will use the part of the Text that is "in row" and the part that is not. But when Full Text does a search: join ContainsTable(position,*,'Computers')as ft on p.PositionID=ft.[key] I assume this is done from a dictionary somewhere and whether the Text field is "in row" or not has no effect on this search. The only effect would be when inserting the record or updating the record and changing the Text field where the dictionary would be updated. Are my assumptions correct? Thanks, Tom > In general, if the bulk of your data is below the threshold where it goes > in row, yes. Otherwise there isn't much of an improvement. [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] >>> > >>> > Tom Hello tshad, I would store the data out of row. Are you using SQL 2000 or sql 2005, if the later you can use varchar(max) which is much better that text data types. See my blog posts and article http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/simons/archive/2006/10/04/SQL_Engine___Storage_of_ Large_Object_Data.aspx Simon Sabin SQL Server MVP http://sqlblogcasts.com/blogs/simons > I assume that that the Full Text engine will use the part of the Text > that is "in row" and the part that is not. [quoted text clipped - 86 lines] >>>>> >>>>> Tom |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.