[sqlite] Difference in backup styles

Greetings! Right now, the way I backup is to create a copy of the SQLite DB file and save it in a directory properly named. Is there a difference in making a backup with the sqlite3 tool? Which one is better? thanks, josé ___ sqlite-users

Re: [sqlite] SQLite version 3.6.10

On Jan 16, 2009, at 4:27 AM, Nicolas Williams wrote: > On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 10:07:29AM -0800, Brown, Daniel wrote: >> The frequent releases are not a problem as far as I am concerned. >> I'd >> rather have bugs fixed quickly when they are discovered, than wait >> months for releases

Re: [sqlite] Avoiding reuse of PrimaryKey values, even in case of truncation

"blackmonkey" wrote in message news:21491295.p...@talk.nabble.com > I have a requirement that the primary keys (auto generated) in a > table never repeat in the life of the database. http://sqlite.org/autoinc.html Igor Tandetnik

[sqlite] Avoiding reuse of PrimaryKey values, even in case of truncation

Hi I have a requirement that the primary keys (auto generated) in a table never repeat in the life of the database. It works fine in case a record is deleted from anywhere but the bottom of the table. But in case of truncation it does not work so. Currently what is happening is say I have

Re: [sqlite] SQLite version 3.6.10

Please keep up the great work. I appreciate your fixing major, identified bugs as fast as possible. Bob Cochran D. Richard Hipp wrote: > SQLite version 3.6.10 is now available on the website. Upgrading is > recommended for all users. > > http://www.sqlite.org/ >

Re: [sqlite] sqlite Btree

On Jan 15, 2009, at 4:54 PM, Alex Krzos wrote: > It is not specified anywhere, but is the sqlite btree a b+tree. I > noticed > that pages with in the btree source file have the ability to be > identified > as either leaf or leafdata does this mean that sqlite uses a b+tree? I recall reading

[sqlite] sqlite Btree

It is not specified anywhere, but is the sqlite btree a b+tree. I noticed that pages with in the btree source file have the ability to be identified as either leaf or leafdata does this mean that sqlite uses a b+tree? ___ sqlite-users mailing list

Re: [sqlite] A question about dates

Carlos Suarez wrote: > I need to know how I can sum and count the field assoiated by record > more especifically this: > > I got several tables associated > ie: client --- buys >name idbuy >idcli idcli > date > and I need to count

Re: [sqlite] A question about dates

thanks for answers so quickly, I need to know how I can sum and count the field assoiated by record more especifically this: I got several tables associated ie: client --- buys name idbuy idcli idcli date and I need to count how many buys got every client

Re: [sqlite] SQLite version 3.6.10

On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 10:07:29AM -0800, Brown, Daniel wrote: > The frequent releases are not a problem as far as I am concerned. I'd > rather have bugs fixed quickly when they are discovered, than wait > months for releases containing needed fixes like other libraries. We > use the loose

[sqlite] need a CURRENT_USER() function

Can anyone tell me set-by-step how to add a CURRENT_USER() function to SQLLITE that will return the current linux login? I'm not a C programmer and I have JUST picked up SQLite. I am trying to convert a Sybase schema to SQLite. The schema has triggers triggers but so far they convert in a

Re: [sqlite] SQLite version 3.6.10

D. Richard Hipp wrote: > [...] > Some concern has been expressed that we are releasing too frequently. > (Three releases in one week is a lot!) The concern is that this > creates the impression of volatility and unreliability. We have been > told that we should delay releases in order to

Re: [sqlite] Question about sqlite3_reset

On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 1:52 PM, Vivien Malerba wrote: > Hi! > > I have the following situation: > * a prepared statement (for a SELECT) on which sqlite3_step has been called > successfully (meaning having returned SQLITE_ROW or SQLITE_DONE each time) > * I call

Re: [sqlite] FW: A list as an SQL paramater

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 17:15:48 -0500, "Griggs, Donald" wrote in General Discussion of SQLite Database : > >Regarding: > "This would definitely work but does incur the overhead of >sqlite3_prepare each time I want to run the query."

Re: [sqlite] Modularity, Joins

On Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:34:12 -0500, Alex Krzos wrote in General Discussion of SQLite Database : >Hi all, > >I am doing a project which involves looking through sqlite code and getting >a feel for how the dbms actually works. I have three questions. >

Re: [sqlite] SQLite version 3.6.10

D. Richard Hipp wrote: > All this is to say that we believe that SQLite version 3.6.10 is the > most stable, most thoroughly tested, and bug-free version of SQLite > that has ever existed. Please do not be freaked out by three releases > occurring in one week. > Not freaked out at all.

Re: [sqlite] SQLite version 3.6.10

D. Richard Hipp wrote: SNIP > Some concern has been expressed that we are releasing too frequently. > (Three releases in one week is a lot!) The concern is that this > creates the impression of volatility and unreliability. SNIP Most software releases have a few latent bugs within them.

[sqlite] SQLite version 3.6.10: Memory savings with large pages

Good morning list, Has anyone else noticed significant memory savings when using larger page sizes since upgrading to 3.6.9 or 3.6.10 (we were on 3.6.1 previously)? We use about 7.32 MB (Peak 9.64 MB) when loading our database into RAM using default settings and using larger page sizes (PRAGMA

Re: [sqlite] SQLite version 3.6.10

I'm a strong believer in the "continuous improvement" philosophy. Keep up the good work. On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 10:07 AM, Brown, Daniel wrote: > The frequent releases are not a problem as far as I am concerned. I'd > rather have bugs fixed quickly when they are discovered,

Re: [sqlite] SQLite version 3.6.10

The frequent releases are not a problem as far as I am concerned. I'd rather have bugs fixed quickly when they are discovered, than wait months for releases containing needed fixes like other libraries. We use the loose pre-generated C files (not the amalgamation) and even then it only takes me

Re: [sqlite] SQLite version 3.6.10 - Warning

On Jan 15, 2009, at 12:43 PM, Christophe Leske wrote: > Hi, > > if my findings are not mistaken, then the commandline executable of > the > new version has some serious problems: > > I have a database (which seems correct so far) from which I would like > to dump a table called "cl1" which is

Re: [sqlite] SQLite version 3.6.10

Thank you for these releases, I appreciate (and agree) with your reasons for the many releases. For me, it really is so simple that all I do is take the Amalgamated version and swap it out for the previous version. I can only think that anyone who has troubles with a swap like this may be doing

Re: [sqlite] [sqlite-announce] SQLite version 3.6.10

On Thu, 15 Jan 2009, D. Richard Hipp wrote: > Some concern has been expressed that we are releasing too frequently. > (Three releases in one week is a lot!) But not when difficult bugs are fixed. > The concern is that this creates the impression of volatility and > unreliability. We have

Re: [sqlite] SQLite version 3.6.10 - Warning

Hi, if my findings are not mistaken, then the commandline executable of the new version has some serious problems: I have a database (which seems correct so far) from which I would like to dump a table called "cl1" which is a virtual table using an rtree: sqlite> .o cl1.sql sqlite> .d cl1

Re: [sqlite] SQLite version 3.6.10

I wholly agree that release frequency should mirror the frequency of serious bugs and their fixes. SQLite3 rarely has serious bugs. Two in one week (one dating to a much earlier version) is out of the ordinary for SQLite3, but not particularly worrisome. And agree with your comments about

[sqlite] SQLite version 3.6.10

SQLite version 3.6.10 is now available on the website. Upgrading is recommended for all users. http://www.sqlite.org/ http://www.sqlite.org/news.html http://www.sqlite.org/download.html SQLite version 3.6.10 fixes a cache coherency bug (Ticket #3584) introduced by check-in

Re: [sqlite] Cross compilation

Yes its generating the binary But how can i make sure that the binary is for ARM I can able to run the binary in X86 environment. (Actually it should not run in x86) On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 7:42 PM, MikeW wrote: > writes: > > > > > Hello MikeW > >

Re: [sqlite] Cross compilation

writes: > > Hello MikeW > All the information in that link to cross compile sqlite > for ARM is Sqlite-3.3.7. > > But now i am using sqlite-3.6.7. I am unable to find the lines to comment in > the latest configure script. > > and I need to generate

Re: [sqlite] CREATE INDEX

"Gregor Brandt" wrote in message news:d69a2465-206e-4cc0-aaeb-971f3752e...@marionette.ca > If I call CREATE INDEX on an existing table will the index be > automatically updated if the table is altered Yes. > I also notice that > CREATE INDEX optionally takes a UNIQUE

Re: [sqlite] Get table name from table entry

"Christoph Walser" wrote in message news:000701c976e7$79330700$6b9915...@ethz.ch > Another idea came into my mind: what I want to do with the > above code is to look up a table and get the rowcount of this table. > If there were an internal table which holds a rowcount for all

[sqlite] CREATE INDEX

If I call CREATE INDEX on an existing table will the index be automatically updated if the table is altered or do i have to create the index again, will this occur between runs? I also notice that CREATE INDEX optionally takes a UNIQUE keyword. If I create a table from scratch how do I define

Re: [sqlite] db collation not working in the tcl interface

Hello! В сообщении от Thursday 15 January 2009 11:35:10 MikeW написал(а): > Surely this is a problem with Tcl's ability to sort non-ASCII characters > rather than SQLite ? > > How about using Tcl_UniCharNcasecmp rather than 'string compare' ? This collation example you can find in official

[sqlite] Database lost

Hi, I have an application running on a Windows Mobile 6 PDA with SQLite database. In a synchronization process I got the following logs from my application: SQL: Insert Or Replace Into MSCLI

Re: [sqlite] db collation not working in the tcl interface

Alexey Pechnikov writes: > > Hello! > > I'm try to do this in tcl with SQLIte 3.6.7: > > proc nocase_compare {a b} { > return [string compare [string tolower $a] [string tolower $b]] > } > db collate NOCASE nocase_compare > > CREATE TABLE test ( > name TEXT --COLLATE

Re: [sqlite] Get table name from table entry

>Christoph Walser >wrote: >> I have a table A with a row called 'services' which contains the names >> of other tables. > >I recommend you change your design. You'll have nothing but trouble with >this. > >Merge all tables into a single table with the extra "service" column. > I'm afraid this