Kris Jurka wrote:
> The
> DataTruncation API is organized around byte sizes and just doesn't seem
> right for numeric data.
There is support throughout that API for "unknown sizes" which seems
appropriate when you're not dealing with explicitly-sized types. And
even types such as varchar don't map directly to bytes anyway..
> Even if the spec does imply that a warning
> shuold be issued (which is not clear to me), I can't imagine why
> anyone would want this. If I want truncation I'll do it myself, otherwise
> I want any error to immediately raise a red flag and put the brakes on
> processing.
I tend to agree -- but Dave evidently has a use for it, in which case
truncation+warning seems a lesser evil than silent truncation.
> How many people really check for warnings anyway?
I hate this argument. If we don't generate any warnings, of course no
one will check for them!
-O
