Assuming I'm understanding what the original message was about.
Isn't this what BEGIN; INSERT OR IGNORE; UPDATE; COMMIT is the right tool for?
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
> If you stick to lower or upper case letters, could encode up to 6 chars in
> the app_id. --DD
The return of RADIX-50.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DEC_Radix-50
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 3:44 PM Dennis Clarke wrote:
>
> Same question as a few days ago.
>
> This may have been asked many times before but always seems to be a
> valid question. On some machines with different compilers I get good
> results using C99 strict compliance. On other machines, such
I've done some reading and kind of side stepped the issue a bit by adding a
reference to System.Data.SQLite and use that connection object to connect
to the database and pass the connection to the MS SQLite driver. I can now
password encrypt databases and (from my very brief tests) it looks like I
On Monday, 18 November, 2019 15:01, Jose Isaias Cabrera
wrote:
>Keith Medcalf, on Monday, November 18, 2019 04:27 PM, wrote...
>>
>> This relies on two implementation details particular to SQLite3 which
>> hold at present, but may of course change at any time:
>> (1) that selecting a
> On Nov 18, 2019, at 2:44 PM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>
> On some machines with different compilers I get good
> results using C99 strict compliance. On other machines, such as those
> running Red Hat Enterprise Linux, I get terrible results.
Why does it matter to you? I usually worry about
Same question as a few days ago.
This may have been asked many times before but always seems to be a
valid question. On some machines with different compilers I get good
results using C99 strict compliance. On other machines, such as those
running Red Hat Enterprise Linux, I get terrible
Not sure this helps, a way to a conditionally insert based on if record
already exists, is a select with literals left outer joined to the maybe
record and use a where test value is null.
Something like this pseudo SQL
insert into T (valueA, valueB') (select 'ValueA', 'ValueB' left outer
join T
On 18 Nov 2019, at 10:00pm, Jose Isaias Cabrera wrote:
> Thanks Keith. So, you are saying that this is a bad INSERT, and I don't know
> much to argue, but is working. If I take out the first IfNull, and there is
> not, at least one instance of 'p006' in the table, the INSERT never works. I
>
Keith Medcalf, on Monday, November 18, 2019 04:27 PM, wrote...
>
> This relies on two implementation details particular to SQLite3 which hold>
> at present,
> but may of course change at any time:
> (1) that selecting a non-aggregate scalar column will return a value from
> (one of) the
>
No. This is an aggregate query that relies on the fact that SQLite3 will
choose the values from (one of) the row(s) containing the aggregate to satisfy
select scalars that are not aggregates. Consider the query:
select a, max(idate), b from t where a == 'p006';
This will return the maximum
Doug, on Monday, November 18, 2019 02:48 PM, wrote...
>
> I'm really confused now. I don't understand the semantics of:
> SELECT IfNull('p006', Max(idate)),
>IfNull(b, 1),
>IfNull(c, 2),
>'y',
>IfNull(e, 4),
>'2019-20-12'
> FROM t
> WHERE a = 'p006';
>
I'm really confused now. I don't understand the semantics of:
SELECT IfNull('p006', Max(idate)),
IfNull(b, 1),
IfNull(c, 2),
'y',
IfNull(e, 4),
'2019-20-12'
FROM t
WHERE a = 'p006';
versus this:
SELECT (a,b,c,d,e,idate) from t where a = "p006"
Doesn't the
On 18 Nov 2019, at 7:37pm, Amirouche Boubekki
wrote:
> I am looking for use-cases for nested transactions. When are nested
> transactions useful in a single writer context?
SQLite doesn't support nested transactions. If you think you want them, you
probably want savepoints instead:
I am looking for use-cases for nested transactions. When are nested
transactions useful in a single writer context?
Thanks in advance!
--
Amirouche ~ https://hyper.dev
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
Doug, on Monday, November 18, 2019 12:31 PM, wrote...
Jose Isaias Cabrera
[clip]
> > >
> > > INSERT INTO t (a, b, c, d, e, idate)
> > > SELECT IfNull('p006', Max(idate)),
> > >IfNull(b, 1),
> > >IfNull(c, 2),
> > >'y',
> > >IfNull(e, 4),
> > >
Thanks - it's working now.
Les
-Original Message-
From: sqlite-users [mailto:sqlite-users-boun...@mailinglists.sqlite.org] On
Behalf Of Joe Mistachkin
Sent: Sunday, November 17, 2019 8:20 PM
To: 'SQLite mailing list'
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Deployment question
Les Woolsey wrote:
>
> 1.
2019-11-14 17:56, David Raymond wrote:
Apparently it got smarter about "primary key unique" in 3.20.0 and stopped
making the extra index when it's a without rowid table. Don't see anything about it in
the release notes though.
Even on the current release "primary key unique" will still make
> -Original Message-
> From: sqlite-users
> On Behalf Of Jose Isaias Cabrera
> Sent: Saturday, November 16, 2019 10:43 AM
> To: SQLite mailing list
> Subject: Re: [sqlite] Question about: Adding a record to a table
> with select failure
>
>
> Jake Thaw, on Saturday, November 16, 2019
Hi Clemens!
Thanks for your fast reply!
And/or how can one "register" an application id to prevent collisions?
Submit a patch here.
In my case, that would be:
--- magic.txt.orig 2019-11-18 18:12:00.957789352 +0100
+++ magic.txt 2019-11-18 18:13:13.055463773 +0100
@@ -29,4
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 2:41 PM Clemens Ladisch wrote:
> Tobias Leupold wrote:
> Apparently, authors or 'private' file formats do not bother to register
> their IDs.
>
Indeed, there's little point, as those are rarely "public".
I tend to chose a 4 letter prefix related to the kind of
Tobias Leupold wrote:
> In the docs, a magic file is linked ( https://www.sqlite.org/src/
> artifact?ci=trunk=magic.txt ) with "registered" formats.
>
> Is there another list with "taken" application ids?
No.
Apparently, authors or 'private' file formats do not bother to register
their IDs.
>
Dominique Devienne, on Monday, November 18, 2019 04:33 AM, wrote...
>
> On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 4:22 PM Jose Isaias Cabrera, on
> wrote:
>
> > Dominique Devienne, on Friday, November 15, 2019 09:02 AM, wrote...
> >
> > Have you tried this,
> > sqlite> select group_concat(distinct id || ', ') from
Hi list!
I recently learned about the PRAGMA application_id feature of SQLite, which is
really nice to be able to identify an application-specific SQLite database at
the file system level, even with versioning support via the user_version
header.
SQLite encourages to use an SQLite database as
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 10:41 AM Shawn Wagner
wrote:
> There is an official github mirror of the fossil repository:
> https://github.com/sqlite/sqlite
Thanks. I thought there was one, but search below didn't find it:
https://www.google.com/search?q=sqlite+github+official+mirror
It's weird the
There is an official github mirror of the fossil repository:
https://github.com/sqlite/sqlite
The amalgamation is two files, though. When you want to upgrade a bundled
sqlite, to a new version it's trivial to update them. Setting up submodules
or whatever seems like massive overkill.
On Mon,
On Fri, Nov 15, 2019 at 4:22 PM Jose Isaias Cabrera
wrote:
> Dominique Devienne, on Friday, November 15, 2019 09:02 AM, wrote...
>
> Have you tried this,
> sqlite> select group_concat(distinct id || ', ') from t;
> 1, ,2, ,4, ,7,
>
> The only problem is that when the list has a non-distinct.
In searches, https://github.com/mackyle/sqlite comes up first,
but given that Fossil has good/better interop with GIT these days,
why not an official mirror?
Also, mirrors are for the normal repo, while ability to refer to an
amalgamation
in one's project by directly linking to it via a GIT
28 matches
Mail list logo
