>> A growing number of organisations now ask me for my DOB or my
>> postcode, rather than my name, when looking me up. I think you just
>> explained why. In my country we have an increasing number of foreign
>> family names, which probably helps it along.
>
>UK postcodes are incredibly
Hi All,
I can see System.Data.Sqlite supports Entity Framework 6. Are there any
plans to support Entity Framework Core?
Apologies if this is a basic question!
Cheers,
Mike
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
On 14 Nov 2019, at 10:27pm, Jake Thaw wrote:
> Why not like this?
>
> insert into t (a, b, c, d, e, idate)
> SELECT a, b, c, 'y', e, '2019-02-12' FROM t WHERE a = 'p001' ORDER BY
> idate desc limit 1;
Dammit. I thought I had tried this, and received a syntax error. Now I see
that it was
On Thursday, 14 November, 2019 15:27, Jake Thaw wrote:
>Why not like this?
>insert into t (a, b, c, d, e, idate)
>SELECT a, b, c, 'y', e, '2019-02-12' FROM t WHERE a = 'p001' ORDER BY
>idate desc limit 1;
Or, if using bound paramaters (and you should be):
insert into t (a, b, c, d, e, idate)
Unfortunately that is not reliable either because the aux_data is specific to
the context and each invocation within the statement can have a different
context.
What does work is if you use the undocumented cross-context aux_data by using a
negative argument number (note, since this is
Why not like this?
insert into t (a, b, c, d, e, idate)
SELECT a, b, c, 'y', e, '2019-02-12' FROM t WHERE a = 'p001' ORDER BY
idate desc limit 1;
On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 9:19 AM Simon Slavin wrote:
>
> On 14 Nov 2019, at 10:06pm, Jose Isaias Cabrera wrote:
>
> > insert into t (a, b, c, d, e,
On 14 Nov 2019, at 10:06pm, Jose Isaias Cabrera wrote:
> insert into t (a, b, c, d, e, idate) values
> (
>(SELECT a FROM t WHERE a = 'p001' ORDER BY idate desc limit 1),
>(SELECT b FROM t WHERE a = 'p001' ORDER BY idate desc limit 1),
>(SELECT c FROM t WHERE a = 'p001' ORDER BY
Greetings!
I have this table,
create table t (n INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, a, b, c, d, e, idate);
insert into t (a, b, c, d, e, idate) values ('p001', 1, 2, 'n', 4,
'2019-02-11');
insert into t (a, b, c, d, e, idate) values ('p002', 2, 2, 'n', 4,
'2019-02-11');
insert into t (a, b, c, d, e, idate)
>On Thursday, 14 November, 2019 03:52, Dominique Devienne
>wrote:
>>On Sat, Nov 9, 2019 at 1:20 PM Mario M. Westphal wrote:
>>> Thanks to all the friendly people who commented on my question. Much
>>> appreciated :-)
>>> I was able to solve this with a small trick:
>>> I created a small
On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 17:18:05 -0700 SQLite mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org said
8><
Give up on names and use something else? (SSN, phone number, DOB…)
None of the above are safe primary keys. I don't think there is any single
combination which is.
Eric
--
ms fnd in a lbry
On Thursday, 14 November, 2019 09:35, Eric wrote:
>On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 00:24:09 + SQLite mailing list
>sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org said
>> A growing number of organisations now ask me for my DOB or my postcode,
>> rather than my name, when looking me up. I think you just
On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 18:41:54 -0700 SQLite mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org said
On Wednesday, 13 November, 2019 17:18, Warren Young
wrote:
8><
... Useless pricks having no need of a phone number usually get (911)
911-9111 ...
It is totally out of order to dismiss _any_
--
The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a
lot about anticipated traffic volume.
On Thursday, 14 November, 2019 03:52, Dominique Devienne
wrote:
>On Sat, Nov 9, 2019 at 1:20 PM Mario M. Westphal wrote:
>> Thanks to all the friendly people who
On Thu, 14 Nov 2019 00:24:09 + SQLite mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org said
8><
A growing number of organisations now ask me for my DOB or my postcode,
rather than my name, when looking me up. I think you just explained why. In
my country we have an increasing number of
Apparently it got smarter about "primary key unique" in 3.20.0 and stopped
making the extra index when it's a without rowid table. Don't see anything
about it in the release notes though.
Even on the current release "primary key unique" will still make an extra index
for the unique if it's a
On Sat, Nov 9, 2019 at 1:20 PM Mario M. Westphal wrote:
> Thanks to all the friendly people who commented on my question. Much
> appreciated :-)
>
> I was able to solve this with a small trick:
> I created a small 'state' struct with a rowid and the result (float) for
> that row.
>
Sounds like
On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 9:20 PM Keith Medcalf wrote:
> [...] The optimizer is prone to calculating things more often than it
> needs to, and is difficult to force to "materialize" things.
Since your expensive function needs to be calculated for every row of the
> table anyway, it would be better
Maybe you are confusing the autoindex logic by including superflous attributes:
... Id INTEGER NOT NULL PRIMARY KEY UNIQUE ...
NOT NULL is enforced for WITHOUT ROWID tables and a single field PRIMARY KEY
already implies UNIQUE, so no autoindex is required for Id
This leaves only the autoindex
Hi list,
Accidentally, when performing VACUUM using rather old SQLite 3.16.2
(from Debian 8 stretch) binary on some database file created with more
recent SQLite (like 3.29.0 available in Qt 5.13.2 or a bit older),
I've discovered that database now has a few more `sqlite_autodinex_*`
entries in
19 matches
Mail list logo
