[AccessD] [Spam] Re: [Spam] Re: Why Change Field Size/was Change FieldS ize

>Is this a changed stance for you?

Nope, I've defaulted to 255 for as long as I can remember.


John W. Colby
www.ColbyConsulting.com 

Contribute your unused CPU cycles to a good cause:
http://folding.stanford.edu/
-----Original Message-----
From: accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com
[mailto:accessd-bounces at databaseadvisors.com] On Behalf Of DWUTKA at marlow.com
Sent: Monday, December 05, 2005 8:44 PM
To: accessd at databaseadvisors.com
Subject: [Spam] Re: [AccessD] [Spam] Re: Why Change Field Size/was Change
FieldS ize

I concur.  Is this a changed stance for you?  I know I was on the 255 length
stance the first time around. ;)

Drew

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	John Colby [SMTP:jwcolby at colbyconsulting.com]
	Sent:	Monday, December 05, 2005 5:43 PM
	To:	'Access Developers discussion and problem solving'
	Subject:	Re: [AccessD] [Spam] Re: Why Change Field Size/was
Change Field Size

	I just ran into a field the other day.  PolicyID, guaranteed to
NEVER be
	more than 10 characters, so the field was set to 10 characters (by
the
	previous programmer).  

	Guess what?  We finally (3 years later) got a policed that was
waaaay more
	than 10 characters.  Of course the entire policy record could not go
in,
	which prevented the claim from being processed.  All users must get
out of
	the database so that I can open up the field (to 255 characters of
course). 

	I don't care WHAT the business rule is, text data can and will
change.  SSN
	is a good example.  It is guaranteed to be XXX-XX-XXXX except that
they are
	running out of SSNs (50 years later) and guess what is going to
change in
	the next few years...

	Length types of rules are not the thing (IMHO) that should be
enforced at
	the DB level.

	John W. Colby
	www.ColbyConsulting.com