[sqlite] System.Data.SQLite version for SQLite 3.7.16

[Nicolas Rivera]

Hi,

The latest version of System.Data.SQLite in the download page is 
1.0.84.0, which appears to have been done for SQLite version 3.7.15.2.  
Is that correct?


If so, is there a plan to update System.Data.SQLite with the latest 
SQLite version?


Do Ineed to wait for a later version of System.Data.SQLite to use with 
SQLite 3.7.16, or should 1.0.84.0 work fine?  I am using SQLite as a 
separate dll (not bundled) with the binaries found in 
sqlite-netFx35-binary-Win32-2008.


Thanks,

Nick

___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users

Re: [sqlite] : C# access to SQLite and Windows 8

[Nicolas Rivera]

Have you looked at this?
http://timheuer.com/blog/archive/2012/08/07/updated-how-to-using-sqlite-from-windows-store-apps.aspx


Thanks for that link.  Yes, I have looked at it before.

Just to make it clear, I know that, according to that blog, sqlite-net 
will work from Metro and desktop.  I also know, according to a previous 
post, that System.Data.SQLite should theoretically work with .NET 4.5.


But, long term, what makes more sense?  That's where I was going with my 
questions.  For example, if there were no plans for sqlite.org to 
continue supporting System.Data.SQLite, then perhaps it would make more 
sense for me to look now, rather than later, at other alternatives -- 
alternatives that could work with both metro and desktop apps.


Although Windows 8 is not out for general availability yet, I am hoping 
some developers have thought about that and may give me some pointers.  
I am also hoping the team at sqlite.org could perhaps share if there are 
any plans for System.Data.SQLite moving forwards.


I am finding that Windows 8 is different enough that it is causing a lot 
of developers to re-think what they will or will not support, 
particularly on the .NET side.


Thanks,

Nick
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users

[sqlite] C# access to SQLite and Windows 8

[Nicolas Rivera]

Hi,

If you have seen this message already, please ignore it.  I received 
some sort of email about message content type from the forum, and I am 
resending it as text just in case.


Currently at my job I am writing code to access SQLite from C# using 
System.Data.SQLite.  We are also looking at Windows 8 and metro apps, 
and I know metro does not support ADO .NET.


I also know of some options out there to access SQLite from C# in a 
metro app.  None of them seem to be based on some "standard" API like 
ADO .NET (again, because there is none in Metro).


With that context in mind, here are my questions.

1. Are there plans to support System.Data.SQLite going forward in 
Windows 8 for the desktop space?


2. Are you (sqlite.org) planning to develop another way to access sqlite 
from a C# metro app?


3. I am looking for recommendations of how to access SQLite from C# on 
Windows 8.  Originally I thought System.Data.SQLite would be the best 
solution because it adheres to ADO .NET and because it is supported by 
sqlite.org.  But given that Microsoft removed ado from metro, I am 
wondering whether another option, that could be used both from the 
desktop and Metro, would be better.  Or perhaps I should use two 
different solutions to access sqlite, which could impact code 
reusability.  But things are different enough in Metro that there may 
not be that much reusable code anyway when all is said and done.


Thanks,

Nick
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users

[sqlite] System.Data.SQLite and .NET 4.5

[Nicolas Rivera]

Hi,

Does System.Data.SQLite support .NET 4.5?  The downloadable binaries only come 
in 3.5 and 4.0 flavors (although it is possible for assemblies to support 
multiple .NET versions).

Thanks,

Nick
  
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users

Re: [sqlite] sqlite3_complete always returning 1?

[Nicolas Rivera]

Jay --

Are you saying that:

(a) sqlite3_complete("") returns 0 in your system and therefore I must 
be doing something wrong,

(b) or sqlite3_complete("") does return 1 and it is a bug?

If I am doing something wrong, does anyone have an idea of what it could be?

The workaround is easy enough, but I am just curious if I have some 
setting or something wrong.

Thanks,

Nick

> On 12/16/2009 5:22 PM, Jay A. Kreibich wrote:
>
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 04:52:16PM -0500, Nicolas Rivera scratched on the 
> wall:
>   
>> Thanks for your reply Dr. Hipp.
>>
>> I just ran those, and they do return 0.
>>
>> But I am confused.  The documentation says:
>> "These routines return 1 if the input string appears to be a complete 
>> SQL statement. A statement is judged to be complete if it ends with a 
>> semicolon token and is not a prefix of a well-formed CREATE TRIGGER 
>> statement."
>> (http://www.hwaci.com/sw/sqlite/c3ref/complete.html)
>> 
>
>   
>> I guess a statement is also judged to be complete if it is the empty 
>> string -- which does not end with a semicolon token.
>> 
>
>
>   That seems wrong; empty string should return a 0 as the string does
>   not contain "one or more non-whitespace tokens."
>
> http://sqlite.org/hlr1.html#H10511
>
> H10511: A successful evaluation of sqlite3_complete() or
> sqlite3_complete16() functions shall return a numeric 1 if and only
> if the input string contains one or more non-whitespace tokens and
> the last non-whitespace token in is a semicolon that is not in the
> middle of a CREATE TRIGGER statement. 
>
>-j
>
>
>   
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users

Re: [sqlite] sqlite3_complete always returning 1?

[Nicolas Rivera]

Thanks for your reply Dr. Hipp.

I just ran those, and they do return 0.

But I am confused.  The documentation says:
"These routines return 1 if the input string appears to be a complete 
SQL statement. A statement is judged to be complete if it ends with a 
semicolon token and is not a prefix of a well-formed CREATE TRIGGER 
statement."
(http://www.hwaci.com/sw/sqlite/c3ref/complete.html)

I guess a statement is also judged to be complete if it is the empty 
string -- which does not end with a semicolon token.

Just as background info, I was attempting to figure out if there was 
more than one statement in a string by doing something like this:

sqlite3_prepare_v2(db, sql, strlen(sql), , );
if (sqlite3_complete(tail))
{
   // more statements
}

which is similar to what "The Definite Guide to SQLite" recommends (pg. 
218).  I had assumed that was the main reason for having this function, 
but it does not seem to work as I would have expected for that 
particular scenario.

Thanks,

Nicolas

> On 12/16/2009 4:14 PM, D. Richard Hipp wrote:
>
>
> On Dec 16, 2009, at 4:10 PM, Nicolas Rivera wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I think I am missing something really simple (some macro or something),
>> because I cannot make sqlite3_complete() to return anything other 
>> than 1.
>>
>> Even when I pass it "" (an empty string), it still returns 1.  I even
>> tried to call sqlite3_initialize() before (although to my knowledge this
>> is not necessary),
>> and I still get 1 with an empty string.
>>
>
>
> sqlite3_complete("/* unterminated comment");
> sqlite3_complete("SELECT 'unterminated string;");
> sqlite3_complete("CREATE TRIGGER unfinished_trigger");
>
> D. Richard Hipp
> d...@hwaci.com
>
>
>
>
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users

[sqlite] sqlite3_complete always returning 1?

[Nicolas Rivera]

Hi,

I think I am missing something really simple (some macro or something), 
because I cannot make sqlite3_complete() to return anything other than 1.

Even when I pass it "" (an empty string), it still returns 1.  I even 
tried to call sqlite3_initialize() before (although to my knowledge this 
is not necessary),
and I still get 1 with an empty string.

I am using version 3.6.19.

Thanks in advance,

Nicolas
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users

[sqlite] advantages of Not using shared cache mode

[Nicolas Rivera]

Hi,

In trying to understand shared cache mode, I would like to know why one 
would Not use it.  According to 
http://www.hwaci.com/sw/sqlite/sharedcache.html, shared cache mode "can 
significantly reduce the quantity of memory and IO required by the system."

In http://www.mail-archive.com/sqlite-users@sqlite.org/msg26239.html, 
Dr. Hipp mentions some threading restrictions related to shared cache 
mode, but all of them seem to have been dropped in version 3.5.0.  For 
example, whereas shared cache was previously enabled/disabled for only 
one thread, now it is for an entire process 
(http://www.hwaci.com/sw/sqlite/c3ref/enable_shared_cache.html).  Even 
the virtual table restriction was removed in version 3.6.17 
(http://www.hwaci.com/sw/sqlite/sharedcache.html).

So if the threading restrictions no longer exist, and if shared cache 
mode is better performing in terms of memory usage and I/O, why is it 
not the default?  What is the advantage of not using it?

Thanks,

Nicolas Rivera
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users

Re: [sqlite] multiple threads with shared cache mode

[Nicolas Rivera]

So then only one write transaction at a time is allowed per database.  
Which means there is no advantage, in terms of concurrency, with using 
shared cache mode.  Right?

> On 11/24/2009 4:17 PM, Pavel Ivanov wrote:
>
> Indeed, it's weird. And I've just realized that if we have two
> simultaneous write transactions they both have to write their own
> journal whenever they wish to write something to disk. SQLite database
> cannot have two different journal files, so it should serialize
> transactions whenever they want to actually write something to the
> file. Maybe that's what was meant in the doc? I can't say, hopefully
> somebody with more knowledge can explain this.
>
> Pavel
>
> On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 3:46 PM, presta  wrote:
>   
>> 
>>> No, it's one write transaction per table.
>>>   
>> Wierd, according to the doc : "At most one connection to a single shared
>> cache may open a write transaction at any one time. This may co-exist with
>> any number of read transactions"
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> View this message in context: 
>> http://old.nabble.com/multiple-threads-with-shared-cache-mode-tp26500974p26502966.html
>> Sent from the SQLite mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>
>> ___
>> sqlite-users mailing list
>> sqlite-users@sqlite.org
>> http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>>
>> 
> ___
> sqlite-users mailing list
> sqlite-users@sqlite.org
> http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
>
>   
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users

[sqlite] multiple threads with shared cache mode

[Nicolas Rivera]

Hi,

It is my understanding, per 
http://www.hwaci.com/sw/sqlite/sharedcache.html section 2.1, that only 
one write transaction may exist while in shared cache mode.  Is that 
correct?

If so, then I am trying to figure out what is the advantage of having 
table level locks in shared cache mode.  If only one write transaction 
can be pending at a time, irrespective of the table, then what advantage 
is there to having table level locks?

To put it another way, is there anything gained in terms of concurrency 
by using shared cached mode versus not using it?  BTW, I am not 
interested in reading uncommitted data.

Thanks in advance,

Nicolas Rivera

___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users