[sqlite] is the lemon parser error handling mechanism broken ?

Hello, since lemon is maintained as an integral part of sqlite, I am posting my report here. * I  am using the latest available lemon.c and lempar.c [  20180421 and 20180423 resp.] The documentation  states:"The error recoverystrategy is to begin popping the parsers stack until it enters

Re: [sqlite] Stored Procedures

Very useful comments in this thread. I recommend adding this to the SQLite FAQ, if it exists. -- Craig H Maynard Rhode Island, USA 401-413-2376 > Date: Tue, 8 May 2018 20:56:45 -0400 > From: Richard Hipp > To: SQLite mailing list >

Re: [sqlite] This list is getting spammed again

On 9 May 2018, at 9:37pm, Cecil Westerhof wrote: > ​I am bitten by it also now. I posted a question and within two minutes I > got a spam message​ I got three or four of these, each one soon after I'd posted a message. Then I got no more. I didn't do anything to

Re: [sqlite] Only see unused when there are unused records

Or SELECT count(*) AS Total, CASE WHEN Sum(used = 'unused') > 0 THEN Sum(used = 'unused') END AS NotUsed FROM quotes There might be a more succinct way Paul www.sandersonforensics.com skype: r3scue193 twitter: @sandersonforens Tel +44 (0)1326 572786

Re: [sqlite] This list is getting spammed again

2018-05-08 9:37 GMT+02:00 Domingo Alvarez Duarte : > Again this list is getting spammed, I just received spam after publish. > ​I am bitten by it also now. I posted a question and within two minutes I got a spam message​ ​that pretended to be a reply on my message.​ --

Re: [sqlite] Only see unused when there are unused records

On 5/9/2018 4:19 PM, Cecil Westerhof wrote: I have a table where I use 'unused' to signify that a record is not yet used. I want to know the number of unused records (but only if there are unused records) and the total number of records. Something like this perhaps: select count(*) Total,

Re: [sqlite] Only see unused when there are unused records

Sorry, re-reading your question I realized my solution doesn't work: it would return 0 when there are unused, but you don't want to see them. Cheers, -- José María (Chema) Mateos https://rinzewind.org/blog-es || https://rinzewind.org/blog-en ___

Re: [sqlite] Only see unused when there are unused records

On Wed, May 9, 2018, at 16:19, Cecil Westerhof wrote: > I have a table where I use 'unused' to signify that a record is not yet > used. I want to know the number of unused records (but only if there are > unused records) and the total number of records. > > At the moment I implemented it like: >

[sqlite] Only see unused when there are unused records

I have a table where I use 'unused' to signify that a record is not yet used. I want to know the number of unused records (but only if there are unused records) and the total number of records. At the moment I implemented it like: SELECT * FROM ( SELECT 'Not used' AS Type ,

Re: [sqlite] "missing" sqlite3 invocation option?

On 9 May 2018, at 7:32pm, John McKown wrote: > The sqlite3 command has a input command to ".read" a file which "contains > SQL in FILENAME". I am wondering why there isn't an equivalent command line > argument to do this. That is, have something like: > > sqlite3

[sqlite] "missing" sqlite3 invocation option?

The sqlite3 command has a input command to ".read" a file which "contains SQL in FILENAME". I am wondering why there isn't an equivalent command line argument to do this. That is, have something like: sqlite3 -f FILENAME database.db3 which would do the same as: sqlite3 database.db3 sqlite>

Re: [sqlite] 3.24 draft - upsert

Per Keith Medcalf's comment on the ancient master file merge, I found this inscription concerning batch processing in the elephant's graveyard: https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/zosbasics/com.ibm.zos.zconcepts/zconc_batchscen2.htm Jim Callahan On Wed, May 9, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Keith

Re: [sqlite] 3.24 draft - upsert

This is a baby implementation of the master file merge from the early part of the last century (after the stone knives but somewhat before bearskins). Take two tables, one mounted on tape drive A, with output to tape drive B, updated from a transaction file on tape drive C. Start Friday

Re: [sqlite] 3.24 draft - upsert

Why does SQLite have to follow what PostgreSQL does? I thought SQLite is the leader. Roman Sent from my T-Mobile 4G LTE Device Original message From: Richard Hipp Date: 5/9/18 5:48 AM (GMT-05:00) To: SQLite mailing list

[sqlite] Change location of "sqlite_history" with environment variable.

When using postgresql and mysql, you can use an environment variable to set where their cli history should be saved (PSQL_HISTORY and MYSQL_HISTFILE). These allow for partial XDG Base Directory Support. Was there ever a discussion regarding using something similar for sqlite (SQLITE_HISTFILE, for

Re: [sqlite] Lots of enhancements coming to version 3.24.0 - please test

Nonono lol On Tue, 8 May 2018, 15:42 Richard Hipp, wrote: > There are a lot of important changes in the SQLite code base since the > previous release. See > https://www.sqlite.org/draft/releaselog/current.html for the latest > summary. > > All of our legacy tests pass and many

Re: [sqlite] 3.24 draft - upsert

Fuck you suck On Wed, 9 May 2018, 09:00 Olivier Mascia, wrote: > About: > > "Column names in the expressions of a DO UPDATE refer to the original > unchanged value of the column, before the attempted INSERT. To use the > value that would have been inserted had the

Re: [sqlite] 3.24 draft - upsert

> Le 9 mai 2018 à 11:48, Richard Hipp a écrit : > >> "Column names in the expressions of a DO UPDATE refer to the original >> unchanged value of the column, before the attempted INSERT. To use the value >> that would have been inserted had the constraint not failed, add the

Re: [sqlite] 3.24 draft - upsert

On 2018/05/09 11:48 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: On 5/9/18, Olivier Mascia wrote: About: "Column names in the expressions of a DO UPDATE refer to the original unchanged value of the column, before the attempted INSERT. To use the value that would have been inserted had the

Re: [sqlite] 3.24 draft - upsert

On 5/9/18, Olivier Mascia wrote: > About: > > "Column names in the expressions of a DO UPDATE refer to the original > unchanged value of the column, before the attempted INSERT. To use the value > that would have been inserted had the constraint not failed, add the special >

Re: [sqlite] Lots of enhancements coming to version 3.24.0 - please test

Richard Hipp wrote: > There are a lot of important changes in the SQLite code base since the > previous release. See > https://www.sqlite.org/draft/releaselog/current.html for the latest > summary. Some corrections in the draft doc: In

[sqlite] 3.24 draft - upsert

About: "Column names in the expressions of a DO UPDATE refer to the original unchanged value of the column, before the attempted INSERT. To use the value that would have been inserted had the constraint not failed, add the special "excluded." table qualifier to the column name." Why using

Re: [sqlite] Does WAL mode's SQLITE_BUSY special circumstances invoke the busy handler?

Donald Shepherd wrote: > The documentation on WAL databases includes a section with caveats re: > SQLITE_BUSY, included below. Do these invoke the busy handler (if > configured) or just return SQLITE_BUSY immediately? In general, SQLite calls the busy handler if there is a chance that the lock

Re: [sqlite] SQLite3 fossil repository not working ?

On Tue 08 May 2018 9:32 AM, Domingo Alvarez Duarte wrote: > Hello ! > > Today I tried to update my sqlite3 repository but somehow it seems not > working properly, I execute "fossil update" as usually and it contacts the > server and exchange info with it but it only see till this commit >