mherger wrote: > > +1 for Inguz. > > As I said before: this is not going to happen. > > > A current version of SQLite. There have been quite a few releases > that > > improve performance over the last few years - > > https://sqlite.org/changes.html . > > Any volunteers to test this change on the 29 platforms we support? Ok, > we can say we only update the top 5 platforms. Which are? And who is > going to test whatever change we need to apply to the code to make it > compatible doesn't break compatibility with the older version? > > What looks like a simple enough change would be a huge amount of work, > and some risk to break things, too. > > I'd be willing to look into this if somebody could update it for Windows > > and whatever recent Linux flavour and give it some thorough testing. But > > as long as I'd have to do it all by myself, it's simply too much. > > > Another option in Settings / Performance to use more memory for > > computers with > 3GB RAM - as an attempt to get some lookups e.g. new > > music, to perform better on Windows based servers. > > Optimization cannot always be done by throwing RAM at them. Some of the > > biggest improvements in 7.8 didn't require much more memory, but some > work to understand where the bottlenecks were, and how to tackle them. > Further improve performance on Windows specifically will require some > thorough analysis of the problem first. > > -- > > Michael
Michael, Thank you for replying. My reading of the SQLite blurb is that code written for earlier versions will run on the latest version. It has always been a Systems Manager's dilemma whether to upgrade the database engine when a new release is made. In the old mainframe and then the super mini computer days we based our decisions on the track record of the database vendor, the hearsay from user groups and finally whether our programmers had written code extracting every last bit of performance (often exploiting undocumented features) or just vanilla code. The vendors also held a stick over our heads with "end of support" dates. My thinking was that if you could update SQLite in 7.9 and tell us in the 7.9 thread then the guinea pigs amongst us would try it out and report back. But maybe it is not that simple.... As to the option to use extra ram, I and others (http://forums.slimdevices.com/showth...hlight=ramdisk) have boosted the speed of New Music and other browsing functions by installing RAMDisk on Windows for libraries over 100,000 tracks. My thinking was that if more of the database was in ram then it would perform better and avoid having to fiddle about with RAMDisk. As I have just discovered after converting an old Win XP box to VortexBox 2.3, SQLite performance on Windows (XP and Win 7) for 100,000 track databases is abysmal compared that on Linux. A camel is a racehorse designed by a committee. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Wirrunna's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=3225 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=101248 _______________________________________________ beta mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/beta
