Re: Can't get more than 255 chars out of memo field in Acc

From: "Dave Page" <dpage(at)vale-housing(dot)co(dot)uk>
To: "Justin Clift" <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>, "Jeff Eckermann" <jeff_eckermann(at)yahoo(dot)com>
Cc: "Bruce Momjian" <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, <pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Can't get more than 255 chars out of memo field in Acc
Date: 2002-11-28 19:21:12
Message-ID: 03AF4E498C591348A42FC93DEA9661B884F2@mail.vale-housing.co.uk
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-odbc

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Justin Clift [mailto:justin(at)postgresql(dot)org]
> Sent: 27 November 2002 21:35
> To: Jeff Eckermann
> Cc: Bruce Momjian; pgsql-odbc(at)postgresql(dot)org
> Subject: Re: [ODBC] Can't get more than 255 chars out of memo
> field in Acc
>
>
> Jeff Eckermann wrote:
> >
> >
> > Good question. The available stuff is piecemeal, and
> > split between techdocs and the odbc site. Joel
> > Burton's FAQ is the largest, but is incomplete and
> > appears not to have been worked on much for the last
> > couple of years. There is the makings of a good FAQ
> > on the odbc site: perhaps that could be moved to
> > techdocs, and expanded using reader contributions? I
> > would be happy to put in some pieces, although I am
> > sure that there are plenty whose knowledge is much
> > greater than mine.
>
> Definitely sounds like a good idea.
>
> Anyone feel comfortable doing it in the new PostgreSQL Guides
> section of Techdocs?

It's a non issue until someone actually identifies any more FAQs to add
- this one is a) not a FAQ, and b) only a problem with the Beta Unicode
driver as far as we can tell.

Besides which, I was kindof under the impression that I was the ODBC
site webmaster or are we deprecating the site and Gborg project?

Regards, Dave.

Responses

Browse pgsql-odbc by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Justin Clift 2002-11-28 20:04:35 Re: Can't get more than 255 chars out of memo field in Acc
Previous Message Dave Page 2002-11-28 12:43:56 Re: ODBC changes