Re: [sqlite] inserts, performance, file lock...

i have no access now to those files. but i didnt change any thing - so default. Nico Williams wrote: > > What's your page size? > ___ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users@sqlite.org > http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users

[sqlite] Shell bug: incorrect handling of some BLOBs.

Subsystem: Shell Title: Incorrect handling of some BLOBs. Type: Code_Defect Severity: Important Priority: Unknown Affected: All SQLite versions containing output_hex_blob() up to 3.7.9. Environment: Tested on various FreeBSD 8.x versions, both i386 and amd64. Probably, other operating

Re: [sqlite] VACUUM

2011/11/10 Richard Hipp > > Because when you are inserting the Nth row, SQLite has no idea of how many > more rows will follow or how big the subsequent rows will be, so it has no > way to reserve contiguous space sufficient to hold them all. The result is > that parts of the

Re: [sqlite] VACUUM

On 10 Nov 2011, at 10:41pm, Fabian wrote: > Is there some trick to force VACUUM-like output when building the > database, and avoid to build it twice? CREATE your TABLES. BEGIN TRANSACTION. INSERT your data. END TRANSACTION. CREATE your INDEXes. This should get you the fastest process, and

Re: [sqlite] VACUUM

On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 5:41 PM, Fabian wrote: > I'm trying to understand the following: Why is it that when I create a new > database, and fill it with rows, why can it not be commited to disk the > same way as VACUUM would do it? Because when you are inserting the Nth

[sqlite] VACUUM

I'm trying to understand the following: Why is it that when I create a new database, and fill it with rows, why can it not be commited to disk the same way as VACUUM would do it? Currently I'm trying to manually vacuum the database by inserting rows sorted by table and by rowid, but as soon as the

Re: [sqlite] Critical bug in Windows VFS retry logic

On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Filip Navara wrote: [snip] The bug has been present since this check-in on 2011-07-28: http://sqlite.org/src/info/8a145863d1a8711953ae72d706404fb96f6fec06 F. ___ sqlite-users mailing list

Re: [sqlite] newer SQLite

Joe Pool wrote: > > However, I see no mention of mobile development support. > The page at: https://system.data.sqlite.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/features.wiki mentions support for the Compact Framework, which is used on Windows CE. > > Is this latest version supported? > Yes. > > If I

Re: [sqlite] SQLITE_FCNTL_CHUNK_SIZE + wal files

On 11/11/2011 01:01 AM, George Pee wrote: Is there a way to make the wal files honor the chunk size specified by sqlite3_file_control and SQLITE_FCNTL_CHUNK_SIZE ? Not currently. ___ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org

[sqlite] SQLITE_FCNTL_CHUNK_SIZE + wal files

Is there a way to make the wal files honor the chunk size specified by sqlite3_file_control and SQLITE_FCNTL_CHUNK_SIZE ? ___ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users

[sqlite] Critical bug in Windows VFS retry logic

Hi, we found a rather serious bug in the retry logic in Windows VFS in SQLite 3.7.9. The function winAccess has roughly the following structure: while( !(rc = GetFileAttributesExW((WCHAR*)zConverted, GetFileExInfoStandard, )) &&

Re: [sqlite] SQLite

On Nov 9, 2011, at 11:39 PM, Bhautik Kothadia wrote: > Is there any Operating System Required for that? See: http://www.sqlite.org/custombuild.html especially section 5.0 Porting SQLite To A New Operating System > If not then How much Memory is required? See:

Re: [sqlite] Creating operators for custom functions

On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:59:31AM +0200, Vincas Dargis scratched on the wall: > Hello, > > It is very nice to have sqlite3_create_function() interface, so I can > implement regexp() with Qt libraries that I use already. > > Snippet from documentation says: > > >The REGEXP operator is a special

Re: [sqlite] Bug Report: Collation is no longer evaluated in nestedqueries

Andreas Wicker wrote: > A simple query like this works fine with both versions, the result is sorted > NOCASE by the Album column: Purely by accident of implementation. No particular order of rows in the resultset is guaranteed, unless there's an ORDER BY clause. If you rely

[sqlite] Bug Report: Collation is no longer evaluated in nested queries

Hello All, We've discovered that collation is no longer evaluated in nested queries. Collation worked fine with at least SQLite3.DLL 3.6.16.x. After updating to 3.7.7.1 the sorting of some queries does no longer reflect the columns Collation definition. The table was created with SQLite

[sqlite] newer SQLite

Hi. I've been using version 1.0.66.0 of SQLite for quite a while now on our Windows Mobile 5 and 6 devices. I have recently learned of this site and it's continuing development of SQLite, now up to version 3.7.9. However, I see no mention of mobile development support. Is this latest version

Re: [sqlite] FTS4: Datatypes

Looks promising! With the me triggers mentioned in http://www.sqlite.org/src/artifact/fdc666a70d5257a64fee209f97cf89e0e6e32b51 , it can be a really time saver. Its awful having to deal with two tables that store a single, split up entity, also the inability to create additional indexes on the

[sqlite] Creating operators for custom functions

Hello, It is very nice to have sqlite3_create_function() interface, so I can implement regexp() with Qt libraries that I use already. Snippet from documentation says: >The REGEXP operator is a special syntax for the regexp() user function. So REGEXP is also an operator which works out of the

Re: [sqlite] Documentation in PDF

On 09-11-2011 12:29, Luuk wrote: On 08-11-2011 14:04, Arbol One wrote: Any one knows where I can get the documentation in http://www.sqlite.org/download.html, but in PDF format? TIA The main problem with this is that PDF is so much baes on a page layout, and HTML is not I tried to

Re: [sqlite] inserts, performance, file lock...

i did some test do check if indexes make it slow. instead of inserting to disk database i use ":memory:" database - i have copied tables only - i assume without indexes and then do inserts - and it works the same. does it prove that it isnt because indexes? Richard Hipp-3 wrote: > > On Wed,