Re: [sqlite] Re: [unclassified] Re: [sqlite] getting rid of dirty SQLITE_BUSY workaround

2005-03-15 Thread Andrew Piskorski
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 01:24:51PM -0500, Ned Batchelder wrote: > The best solution is to rollback entire transactions when the database is > busy. This means structuring your code so that all transactions can > rollback and retry. In my experience, this is necessary (though *far* less >

RE: [sqlite] Re: [unclassified] Re: [sqlite] getting rid of dirty SQLITE_BUSY workaround

2005-03-15 Thread Jay
> Regarding: ... As an example the ethernet card you're probably using > right > now. > ... they detect the collision, wait a short period, and retry. > > For those using Unix/Linux, would this provide the queuing needed for > those > apps with numerous parallel writes? >

RE: [sqlite] Re: [unclassified] Re: [sqlite] getting rid of dirty SQLITE_BUSY workaround

2005-03-15 Thread Ned Batchelder
t/clemensv/PermaLink,guid,826bc7c9-8b0f-4df6-aa be-e6c5377a9446.aspx --Ned. -Original Message- From: Andrew Piskorski [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, March 14, 2005 8:23 PM To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [sqlite] Re: [unclassified] Re: [sqlite] getting ri

RE: [sqlite] Re: [unclassified] Re: [sqlite] getting rid of dirty SQLITE_BUSY workaround

2005-03-15 Thread Griggs, Donald
Regarding: ... As an example the ethernet card you're probably using right now. ... they detect the collision, wait a short period, and retry. For those using Unix/Linux, would this provide the queuing needed for those apps with numerous parallel writes?

Re: [sqlite] Re: [unclassified] Re: [sqlite] getting rid of dirty SQLITE_BUSY workaround

2005-03-15 Thread Jay
> I have not tried this with SQLite, but if I was using SQLite for such > an app, I assume I would need to serialize all such writes through a > single thread or process. E.g., in my web server, the connection > thread servicing the user request would send a message to my one > single db writer

Re: [sqlite] Re: [unclassified] Re: [sqlite] getting rid of dirty SQLITE_BUSY workaround

2005-03-14 Thread Andrew Piskorski
On Tue, Mar 15, 2005 at 12:21:15AM +0100, Thomas Lotterer wrote: > On Sun, Mar 13, 2005, jed wrote: > > > [...] web applications fit well into the model of "many readers, one > > writer", sqlite does this very well. > > > Well, there might be web applications which are read-only from the web's >

Re: [sqlite] Re: [unclassified] Re: [sqlite] getting rid of dirty SQLITE_BUSY workaround

2005-03-14 Thread Uriel_Carrasquilla
te.org cc: 03/13/2005 09:33 Subject: [sqlite] Re: [unclassified] Re: [sqlite] getting rid of