Hi Xoopsers,

I use WFSection on nearly all of my XOOPS sites with great success. I frequently need to post long single articles that wind up getting trimmed if I'm not careful. So far, I work around this by creating the articles in HTML and using the wrap feature, which works like a charm. However, as I am also using a handy-dandy cross-referencing hack that performs a search/replace on wfsections content on the fly - very useful for internal linking - I would like to post these directly in wf instead. The cross-reference hack doesn't work on embedded html files.

I thought that I was running into the 64K size limit of the text format maintext field, and that all I would need to do to avoid this is to change the column format of the maintext field in wfsections to one with a larger limit, presumably mediumtext. Is that guess correct, and is it possible to change the column format to mediumtext without damaging anything within wf? And if not, is there another simple way to expand that limit?

Thanks in advance,

Béla

Try changing the type to longtext in your wfsection db table -- this shouldn't affect any existing data.


Brad

Hi,

Which is the table & field in question ? Just curious, did anyone try this, and does it work OK ? I have many articles over 100K and this is going to be a problem for me if I use wfsection. Is this database change likely to negatively impact future upgrade installs ?

Talking of future, does anyone know if this 64K limit thing going to be addressed in the next version of wfsection ?

Thanks,

Amok

I don't specifically know which table, since I don't use this module. However, I had a similar problem with another module.

It had a content field which had the type set as "text", and it was truncating my entries. I changed this to "longtext" (using the phpmyadmin mod) which fixed the problem.


Brad

Thanks Brad,

I found it after poking around with phpadmin, the table is xfs_article and the field is maintext.

I changed it from TEXT to MEDIUMTEXT and I have a 500K article in there, which is fine for now. I decided not to go to LONGTEXT since I dont need larger than that and it would waste space.

Thanks again,

Amok

Good to know! I wasn't aware that there was a mediumtext option. I don't know much about MySQL, so is there quite a difference between the space taken up by mediumtext vs. longtext?

Does anyone have an idea regarding how much text can be stored within the mediumtext designation?

I've been using longtext, but if I can get away with mediumtext, it probably makes more sense to do so.


Brad

Brad,

Found this in the MySQL manual athttp://www.mysql.com/doc/en/Column_types.html

MEDIUMTEXT
A BLOB or TEXT column with a maximum length of 16777215 (2^24 - 1) characters

LONGTEXT
A BLOB or TEXT column with a maximum length of 4294967295 or 4G (2^32 - 1) characters.

Amok