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

[jed]

I like sqlite for it's simplicity in administration, small footprint, and 
reliability, this coupled with a very robust implementation of SQL. a lot 
embedded and web applications fit well into the model of "many readers, one 
writer", sqlite does this very well. Applications that need many concurrent 
tasks doing updates might think about using a server based RDBMS that  has 
the added complexity and size for this purpose.

All this said ...
It might me nice to have an option where you can have sqlite "wait 
forever"  might be nice to implement as a pragma.  the downside is that ... 
well things might wait for a very long time and appear to hang.

Just an idea,
Jim Dodgen
At 06:01 PM 3/13/2005, you wrote:
On Sun, 2005-03-13 at 16:49 -0500, D. Richard Hipp wrote:
> On Sun, 2005-03-13 at 21:56 +0100, Thomas Lotterer wrote:
>
> > I cannot believe it is normal behavior of a database application running
> > on a multitasking operating system to assume there will only be one
> > writer and otherwise let the application fail or do retries by itself.
> >
>
> I'll look into it.
>
http://www.sqlite.org/cvstrac/chngview?cn=2385
--
D. Richard Hipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>