On Thu, 20 Dec 2007, Oliver Jowett wrote:
> My main concern is that 'text' is a very common type to use in PostgreSQL
> based designs, and that JDBC applications are more likely to understand how
> to interpret a field that claims to be VARCHAR than one that is LONGVARCHAR,
> given that LONGVARCHAR is a relatively strange type and at best poorly
> defined.
This is my concern as well, which is why I suggested that changing the
precision value might be a better solution. Daniel, any opinion on that
alternative?
Kris Jurka
