Andrew Finkenstadt wrote:
On 6/20/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Scott Hess" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/20/07, Andrew Finkenstadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > How difficult do you think it would be to support an alternative
method of
> > indexing within SQLite
On 6/20/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Scott Hess" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/20/07, Andrew Finkenstadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > How difficult do you think it would be to support an alternative
method of
> > indexing within SQLite specifically to support O(1)
"Scott Hess" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/20/07, Andrew Finkenstadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > How difficult do you think it would be to support an alternative method of
> > indexing within SQLite specifically to support O(1) retrieval of the rowid
> > for a table, and then potentially
On 6/20/07, Scott Hess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/20/07, Andrew Finkenstadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How difficult do you think it would be to support an alternative method
of
> indexing within SQLite specifically to support O(1) retrieval of the
rowid
> for a table, and then
On 6/20/07, Andrew Finkenstadt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
How difficult do you think it would be to support an alternative method of
indexing within SQLite specifically to support O(1) retrieval of the rowid
for a table, and then potentially O(1) retrieval of the row data for a
table, when
How difficult do you think it would be to support an alternative method of
indexing within SQLite specifically to support O(1) retrieval of the rowid
for a table, and then potentially O(1) retrieval of the row data for a
table, when in-order retrieval is undesired?
My database design is highly
6 matches
Mail list logo