Re: [sqlite] Large Database Windows vs Linux

On 29 Jun 2013, at 1:22am, Howard Chu wrote: > David de Regt wrote: >> It's the kind of useful help like this that makes me love the FOSS movement. > > All based in facts, of course. http://blog.zorinaq.com/?e=74 Nevertheless, the remark was not helpful and is therefore best

Re: [sqlite] Large Database Windows vs Linux

David de Regt wrote: It's the kind of useful help like this that makes me love the FOSS movement. All based in facts, of course. http://blog.zorinaq.com/?e=74 -David -Original Message- From: sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org [mailto:sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org] On Behalf Of

Re: [sqlite] Large Database Windows vs Linux

It's the kind of useful help like this that makes me love the FOSS movement. -David -Original Message- From: sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org [mailto:sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Walter Hurry Sent: Friday, June 28, 2013 5:09 PM To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org Subject: Re:

Re: [sqlite] Large Database Windows vs Linux

On Fri, 28 Jun 2013 15:22:57 -0600, Keith Medcalf wrote: > That would explain why the best thing to be done with System Destroyer > (System Restore) is the same as the best way to handle the Hardware > Destroyer (Power Management) in Windows. Disable it completely. > The best thing to do with

Re: [sqlite] Large Database Windows vs Linux

FWIW, with our test and prod implementations, we find between a 3 and 10x (300-1000%) increase in almost all of our query times on Windows NTFS over OSX and iOS systems, depending on the query type. We've done a bunch of testing and can verify it every time. I started a thread on this ~7

Re: [sqlite] Large Database Windows vs Linux

That would explain why the best thing to be done with System Destroyer (System Restore) is the same as the best way to handle the Hardware Destroyer (Power Management) in Windows. Disable it completely. > -Original Message- > From: sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org

Re: [sqlite] Large Database Windows vs Linux

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 28/06/13 13:17, RSmith wrote: > Best guess is some other system is trying to also look into that file, > making the Windows file manager stutter quite possibly the Win7 > Preview pane, a 3rd party file indexer service, an anti-virus system or >

Re: [sqlite] Large Database Windows vs Linux

I think your assumption about the file system is correct - It is hard for the code to produce widely differing times under different systems as the basic algorithms do not change between systems, only dependencies on file-system or VFS specific api's etc. The NTFS file system in Windows (hoping

[sqlite] Shell: .IMPORT does not seem to obey .BAIL setting

Trying to import data into a table the operation stops on first error (actually a rollback seems to be performed) because of column number mismatch. Why does it not follow the .BAIL ON/OFF setting? And, why rows before the error are removed? So, in .BAIL OFF mode, I expected errors to

Re: [sqlite] GUI for SQLite

I've been impressed by sqliteexpert Personal Edition (for Windows) I haven't found a great one for OSX yet. -- View this message in context: http://sqlite.1065341.n5.nabble.com/GUI-for-SQLite-tp11673p69729.html Sent from the SQLite mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: [sqlite] Performance regression since 3.7.15

He said using the NGQP snapshot the query indeed runs fast. I think you mentally inserted some negation in that statement, DRH. On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Elan Feingold wrote: > > > >> Q2 runs

Re: [sqlite] Large Database Windows vs Linux

On 28 June 2013 18:08, Stephan Beal wrote: > i've seen sqlite3 tests of mine in a 32-bit VM running on > 64-bit hardware run twice as fast as that same code on the > 64-bit hardware (outside the VM) One of our customers uses our product on a VM, and it appears that the hypervisor lies about

Re: [sqlite] Large Database Windows vs Linux

On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 7:18 PM, Simon Slavin wrote: > Probably that your entire VM is in cache memory on your computer, but the > program running on your hardware gets to write to a physical disk drive. > That's certainly the most likely hypothesis i've heard so far. i

Re: [sqlite] Large Database Windows vs Linux

On 28 Jun 2013, at 6:08pm, Stephan Beal wrote: > On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Christopher W. Steenwyk < > csteen...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I also did try version 3.7.13 and that did run faster. So for whatever >> reason my shell 3.7.17 (32 or 64 bit) is significantly

Re: [sqlite] Large Database Windows vs Linux

On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 6:55 PM, Christopher W. Steenwyk < csteen...@gmail.com> wrote: > I also did try version 3.7.13 and that did run faster. So for whatever > reason my shell 3.7.17 (32 or 64 bit) is significantly slower on windows > than my 3.7.13 32-bit. > Vaguely related to those

Re: [sqlite] Large Database Windows vs Linux

Thanks for the input. I did recompile in 64-bit mode with no difference. I also did try version 3.7.13 and that did run faster. So for whatever reason my shell 3.7.17 (32 or 64 bit) is significantly slower on windows than my 3.7.13 32-bit. On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 10:30 AM, og

Re: [sqlite] The next-generation query planner

Richard Hipp writes: > The combination of schema, sqlite_stat1, and query is normally sufficient, > yes. > > Can you change (and shorten) the table and index and column names to > obscure their meaning and origin, and give us written permission to include > your case in the published

Re: [sqlite] Differences from 3.7.11 to 3.7.16/17 ?

Are the old prebuild binary versions (dll windows) available from somewhere ? Marten ___ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users

Re: [sqlite] Performance regression since 3.7.15

On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 6:50 PM, Elan Feingold wrote: > >> Q2 runs excruciatingly slowly in 3.7.15.2 (1m 28sec). We then observed > >> that Q2 was fast in 3.7.14 (300ms), but slow in 3.7.15.2 and later > (tested > >> up until 3.7.17). > >> > > > > Have you tried it with the

Re: [sqlite] Large Database Windows vs Linux

I had a similar problem and it was the antivirus (win 7 prof)... My table has about 63 million rows and a description very similar to yours... but now I use the same data for FTS4, etc... on Debian wheeze (simple workstation... and currently all ok...) example: sqlite> select count(*) from parte;

Re: [sqlite] Differences from 3.7.11 to 3.7.16/17 ?

On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Marten Feldtmann wrote: > I have written a wrapper for VASmalltalk and I had tested it (under > Windows 7/32bit - with the downloadable dll's) up to 3.7.11. > > Today I used the 3.7.16/17 and foudn out, that all the stuff, where > callbacks

Re: [sqlite] The next-generation query planner

On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 8:45 AM, Wolfgang Enzinger wrote: > Richard Hipp writes: > > > Nevertheless, it is important that you test the NGQP in your application. > > Getting back at the issue described in > http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.db.sqlite.general/81564

[sqlite] Differences from 3.7.11 to 3.7.16/17 ?

I have written a wrapper for VASmalltalk and I had tested it (under Windows 7/32bit - with the downloadable dll's) up to 3.7.11. Today I used the 3.7.16/17 and foudn out, that all the stuff, where callbacks to Smalltalk (from SQLite) are used (tracing, external functions) did not work any

[sqlite] Large Database Windows vs Linux

Hi, I have been struggling with a problem and was hoping I could get some insight. I have a rather large database (11 GB) that has two tables (one with approximately 500,000 rows and another with approximately 50,000,000 rows). In this database I am performing a query that joins these two

Re: [sqlite] The next-generation query planner

Richard Hipp writes: > > I try to compile with SQLITE_HAS_CODEC defined I get errors saying that > > sqlite3_key_v2 and sqlite3_rekey_v2 functions are undefined. Are these new > > APIs? > > > > Yes. You need to use your login and password to download the latest SEE > source - the

Re: [sqlite] Performance regression since 3.7.15

On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 6:32 AM, Eduardo wrote: > On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 14:23:50 -1000 > Elan Feingold wrote: > > > The crux of the query which makes it pathologically slow in 3.7.15+ > appears to be this bit: "join metadata_item_settings on >

Re: [sqlite] The next-generation query planner

On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 7:21 AM, E.Pasma wrote: > > I tested the draft version ... > Thanks for the test report! > Unfortunately I also found a bug. For some reason the optimizer may ignore > a where clause on an outerjoined table. The example below shows this, as > far

Re: [sqlite] The next-generation query planner

Op 26 jun 2013, om 16:08 heeft Richard Hipp het volgende geschreven: The next-generation query planner (NGQP) is a rewrite of the query planner for SQLite that is faster (reduced run-time for sqlite3_prepare()) and generates better plans for queries (reducing the run-time for

Re: [sqlite] The next-generation query planner

On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 6:50 AM, Wolfgang Enzinger wrote: > Richard Hipp writes: > > > Amalgamations for the latest SQLite containing the NGQP are available > from > > the http://www.sqlite.org/draft/download.html page. This should be a > > drop-in replacement for

Re: [sqlite] The next-generation query planner

Richard Hipp writes: > Amalgamations for the latest SQLite containing the NGQP are available from > the http://www.sqlite.org/draft/download.html page. This should be a > drop-in replacement for the amalgamation you are currently using. There > are no new APIs or compiler flags to

Re: [sqlite] Performance regression since 3.7.15

On Wed, 26 Jun 2013 14:23:50 -1000 Elan Feingold wrote: > The crux of the query which makes it pathologically slow in 3.7.15+ appears > to be this bit: "join metadata_item_settings on > metadata_item_settings.guid=grandchild.guid and >

Re: [sqlite] Is there available sample "featured" SQLite database file?

> Here is your starter schema (and perfectly valid): > create table ""("" ""); Thanks for this snippet! Actually found a bug :) > For performance testing this could be helpful with the --dump-sql arg: > https://code.google.com/p/apsw/source/browse/tools/speedtest.py Well, performance is

Re: [sqlite] Is there available sample "featured" SQLite database file?

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 28/06/13 01:12, Sqlite Dog wrote: > I'm wondering is there available sample "feature-tight" > "limit-striking" SQLite database (or SQL script) for GUI manager > testing purposes? You can certainly measure coverage of sqlite3.c itself when running

[sqlite] Is there available sample "featured" SQLite database file?

Hi, we are developing (yet another :) SQLite manager. I'm wondering is there available sample "feature-tight" "limit-striking" SQLite database (or SQL script) for GUI manager testing purposes? Like: - identifier names contains spaces, UNICODE chars, are surrounded by [], by "" or not