On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Andres Riancho
wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Roger Binns wrote:
> >
> > It sounds like what you could use temporary tables and let SQLite do the
> > work for you.
>
> > Hmmm. How about this. Stop turning synchronous off for a month or two
> and see if
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Roger Binns wrote:
> On 08/09/14 03:49, Andres Riancho wrote:
>> Off-list some guys contacted me and mentioned APSW [0], another
>> wrapper around sqlite for python, and said that it might be worth
>> giving it a try. Do you guys believe that a change in wrapper cou
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 2:27 PM, Roger Binns wrote:
> On 08/09/14 03:29, Andres Riancho wrote:
>> In my project we use the database to store data during the process
>> life, and then remove it when the process finishes.
>
> It sounds like what you could use temporary tables and let SQLite do the
>
On 08/09/14 03:49, Andres Riancho wrote:
> Off-list some guys contacted me and mentioned APSW [0], another
> wrapper around sqlite for python, and said that it might be worth
> giving it a try. Do you guys believe that a change in wrapper could
> improve my situation? Thanks!
(Disclosure: I am the
On 8 Sep 2014, at 6:27pm, Roger Binns wrote:
> The problem with synchronous off is that all your code has to be perfect,
Hmmm. How about this. Stop turning synchronous off for a month or two and see
if people stop reporting the fault.
Simon.
___
s
On 08/09/14 03:29, Andres Riancho wrote:
> In my project we use the database to store data during the process
> life, and then remove it when the process finishes.
It sounds like what you could use temporary tables and let SQLite do the
work for you.
> With this in mind, sync=OFF still looks like
On 8 Sep 2014, at 11:47am, Andres Riancho wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 11:39 PM, Simon Slavin wrote:
>
>> There are two possibilities:
>>
>> A) The database really is malformed
>> B) The client's copy of SQLite is returning that code by mistake.
>>
>> Can you have one of these clients sen
Off-list some guys contacted me and mentioned APSW [0], another
wrapper around sqlite for python, and said that it might be worth
giving it a try. Do you guys believe that a change in wrapper could
improve my situation? Thanks!
[0] https://github.com/rogerbinns/apsw
On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 11:11 P
Simon,
On Sun, Sep 7, 2014 at 11:39 PM, Simon Slavin wrote:
>
> On 8 Sep 2014, at 3:11am, Andres Riancho wrote:
>
>>I'm using sqlite as the database backend for an open source
>> project and it works perfectly 99% of the time; however some users
>> have reported "database disk image is malfo
Roger,
On Mon, Sep 8, 2014 at 12:26 AM, Roger Binns wrote:
> On 07/09/14 19:11, Andres Riancho wrote:
>> * I'm setting [4] "PRAGMA synchronous=OFF" for increased
>> performance. Can this trigger malformed errors?
>
> Read the doc:
>
> https://sqlite.org/pragma.html#pragma_synchronous
>
On 07/09/14 19:11, Andres Riancho wrote:
> * I'm setting [4] "PRAGMA synchronous=OFF" for increased
> performance. Can this trigger malformed errors?
Read the doc:
https://sqlite.org/pragma.html#pragma_synchronous
TLDR: yes
To improve write performance use WAL:
https://sqlite.org/w
On 8 Sep 2014, at 3:11am, Andres Riancho wrote:
>I'm using sqlite as the database backend for an open source
> project and it works perfectly 99% of the time; however some users
> have reported "database disk image is malformed" errors [1][2].
There are two possibilities:
A) The database r
List,
I'm using sqlite as the database backend for an open source
project and it works perfectly 99% of the time; however some users
have reported "database disk image is malformed" errors [1][2].
At the moment the w3af project has a really clean wrapper around
sqlite [3] which allows man
13 matches
Mail list logo