Hi,
I compile SQLite 3.3.4 on Linux ia64 box and noticed the following
warnings during the compilation:
./src/table.c: In function `sqlite3_get_table':
./src/table.c:149: warning: cast to pointer from integer of different size
./src/table.c: In function `sqlite3_free_table':
./src/table.c:194:
Hi,
I'm running SQLite 3.3.4 tests suite on Linux (Red Hat 4 Update 2)
Itanium box. I got the following test failures:
4 errors out of 24863 tests
Failures on these tests: printf-8.1 printf-8.2 printf-9.5 types3-1.3
Information on the console:
printf-8.1...
Error: integer value too large to
Hi,
I don't know whether it's been already reported or not, so anyway.
There are places in SQLite where unaligned access exception is
generated on Itanium. The unaligned access means that someone tries to
read or write memory crossing 8-bytes boundary. Usually this occur as
a result of pointers
Also, I've verified that this is exactly the reason of unaligned
accesses by making SumCtx bigger so that it doesn't fit into NBFS
bytes. After that I was able to execute all tests without unaligned
access exceptions. But those printf-8.1 printf-8.2 printf-9.5
types3-1.3 still fail, so it is not
Alexei Alexandrov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I'm running SQLite 3.3.4 tests suite on Linux (Red Hat 4 Update 2)
Itanium box. I got the following test failures:
4 errors out of 24863 tests
Failures on these tests: printf-8.1 printf-8.2 printf-9.5 types3-1.3
Information on the console:
Alexei Alexandrov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I don't know whether it's been already reported or not, so anyway.
There are places in SQLite where unaligned access exception is
generated on Itanium. The unaligned access means that someone tries to
read or write memory crossing 8-bytes
As far as I understand, this fix will take the problem away only
because SumCtx is bigger now. But the problem with
sqlite3_aggregate_context will remain: the pointer returned will not
be aligned properly if the size of the context is less or equal 32
bytes. Am I correct?
On 3/25/06, [EMAIL
Alexei Alexandrov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As far as I understand, this fix will take the problem away only
because SumCtx is bigger now. But the problem with
sqlite3_aggregate_context will remain: the pointer returned will not
be aligned properly if the size of the context is less or equal 32
Alexei Alexandrov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I use those that come with the distribution. Since it's one of the
latest distros (Red Hat EL 4 Update 2), it's not that archaic:
$ rpm -qa | grep tcl
tcl-devel-8.4.7-2
tcl-8.4.7-2
That should be sufficient.
printf-8.1...
Error: integer
Alexei Alexandrov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
We consider using SQLite for some of our applications and I would like to a=
sk
whether there are existing cases of using SQLite on the following OSes:
- Mac
- Windows
- Linux
and with following architectures
- x86
- x86_64
- ia64
From your subsequent posts, I presume that you are figuring out
for yourself that there are no showstoppers, though perhaps some
minor alignment issues on ia64.
I personally test each release on ix86 Linux (currently SuSE 9.2),
on Win2K (running under VMWare on the afore mentioned SuSE box)
Alexei Alexandrov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A side note: from previous experience with some other DB engines I
know that sometimes alignment issues are not minor at all. They can be
deeply in on-disk format and sometimes it is difficult to avoid them
without having to change the on-disk
Alexei Alexandrov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Perhaps the following definition of Mem would work better:
struct Mem {
u16 flags;
u8 type;
u8 enc;
char *z;
int n;
i64 i;
double r;
char zShort[NBFS];
void (*xDel)(void *);
};
Not exactly,
Who can tell me what the correct column names should be
for a UNION. For example:
SELECT a, b FROM t1 UNION SELECT x, y FROM t2;
The result set of the query above has two columns. Should
those columns be named a and b or x and y?
Does anybody know what the SQL standard says? Do all the
Microsoft SQL seems to use the column names from the
first select. So that would be a, b in your example.
Rob
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Sqlite-users sqlite-users@sqlite.org
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 3:45 PM
Subject: [sqlite] Column names in a UNION
Who
Hello,
I have some questions to autocommit mode of SQLite 3.3.4 and its
transactions.
Did I understand it right that new or changed row data is only written
to disk when the db connection is closed with sqlite3_close?
Did I understand it right that after a transaction commit, autocommit is
Markus Kolb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I have some questions to autocommit mode of SQLite 3.3.4 and its
transactions.
Did I understand it right that new or changed row data is only written
to disk when the db connection is closed with sqlite3_close?
No. Data is guaranteed to be
I am not sure if I am being crazy, but I seem to be getting a wierd result
when using 'BETWEEN'.
if use
SELECT count(call_id) as num_rows WHERE ring_time BETWEEN 6 and 10;
I get 0 results
but if I do
SELECT count(call_id) as num_rows WHERE ring_time = 7;
I get 39 results
SELECT count(call_id)
Perhaps a better fix is this:
struct Mem {
i64 i;
double r;
char *z;
int n;
u16 flags;
u8 type;
u8 enc;
void (*xDel)(void *);
union {
long double notUsed1;
char zShort[NBFS];
};
};
The compiler would then (hopefully) insert an
On 3/25/06, Rob Lohman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Microsoft SQL seems to use the column names from the
first select. So that would be a, b in your example.
This seems to be the case for current stable versions of Firebird,
Postgres and MySQL as well.
--
Nemanja Corlija [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If i do
SELECT count(call_id) as num_rows WHERE ring_time BETWEEN 10 and 6;
I get 633 results.
Is that normal?
- Original Message -
From: Lloyd Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
Sent: Saturday, March 25, 2006 3:48 PM
Subject: [sqlite] Wierd between results
I am not
Go back to my original problem if I change 'between 6 and 10' to 'between 6
and 9', I get the expected results.
SELECT count(call_id) as num_rows WHERE ring_time BETWEEN 6 and 9;
232
Am I finding a bug or is my syntax incorrect?
- Original Message -
From: Lloyd Thomas [EMAIL
Lloyd Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am not sure if I am being crazy, but I seem to be getting a wierd result
when using 'BETWEEN'.
if use
SELECT count(call_id) as num_rows WHERE ring_time BETWEEN 6 and 10;
I get 0 results
but if I do
SELECT count(call_id) as num_rows WHERE ring_time
Since we're on this topic, what do other databases return for these queries?
sqlite select 1 as a, 2 as b UNION ALL select 3 as b, 4 as a;
a|b
1|2
3|4
sqlite select * from (select 1 as a, 2 as b UNION ALL select 3 as b, 4 as a)
where b = 3;
b|a
3|4
sqlite select * from (select
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Markus Kolb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I have some questions to autocommit mode of SQLite 3.3.4 and its
transactions.
Did I understand it right that new or changed row data is only written
to disk when the db connection is closed with sqlite3_close?
No.
Markus Kolb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am using autocommit and I call sqlite3_exec with a SQL-INSERT inside a
sqlite_callback()-function which gets called for each row of a
SQL-SELECT (sqlite3_exec, too).
So again my question what can I do to get the data written to DB file or
why there
On 3/25/06, Joe Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Since we're on this topic, what do other databases return for these queries?
sqlite select 1 as a, 2 as b UNION ALL select 3 as b, 4 as a;
a|b
1|2
3|4
mysql select 1 as a, 2 as b UNION ALL select 3 as b, 4 as a;
+---+---+
| a | b |
Lloyd Thomas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
if use
SELECT count(call_id) as num_rows WHERE ring_time BETWEEN 6 and 10;
I get 0 results
You DID specify a table in your actual queries, didn't you?
select * from tbl;
t x y
-- -- --
1
Yeah I did. sorry about the rushed typing.
DRH managed to sort it out for me. I had imported a ver 2 database to
version 3 and changed a time values to integers, but forgot to change the
column to integer.
Lloydie-T
- Original Message -
From: Kurt Welgehausen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
Oracle 8i:
SQL select 1 as a, 2 as b from dual UNION ALL select 3 as b, 4 as a from dual;
A B
-- --
1 2
3 4
SQL select * from (select 1 as a, 2 as b from dual UNION ALL select 3 as b, 4
as a from dual) where b = 3;
Same is true for Oracle 8i/9i/10g.
E.
--- Rob Lohman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Microsoft SQL seems to use the column names from the
first select. So that would be a, b in your example.
Rob
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Sqlite-users sqlite-users@sqlite.org
As has been stated in the past SQLite is a small foot print RDBMS, one
of the things keeping it small is that it does not have a large query
optimizer.
One of the things that can happen is if you have lots of indexes the
optimizer may pick something non optimum
My tricks are as follows:
1.
Jim Dodgen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. get the optimizer to ignore indexes that I know cannot help
I do this in the where clause, by adding a zero or concatenating a
depending upon the data type
examples:
where sex = M
changed to
where sex|| = M
It is more efficient
33 matches
Mail list logo
