:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 3. Juli 2007 12:12
An: sqlite-users@sqlite.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Betreff: Re: [sqlite] Re: In Mem Query Performance
Hi Ken,
Thanks a lot.
But this would require the key to be short. Will Check if this is acceptable
to all as we may not be able to port old db
. Juli 2007 18:21
An: sqlite-users@sqlite.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Betreff: Re: [sqlite] Re: In Mem Query Performance
Hi,
As said, i used a seperate ID (hash) but it made the performance very bad.
Now it takes minutes.[Version: 3.4.0]
regards
ragha
unsigned long idGen(const
/Now Query Data.
time_t start = time(0);
for(int k=0;k<10 ;k++)
{
//idKey = idGen(data[k]);
ret = sqlite3_bind_int64(pVM,
sqlite3_bind_parameter_index(pVM, ":xyz"),
idKeyArr[k]);
rg; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Betreff: Re: [sqlite] Re: In Mem Query Performance
Just a thought regarding this key issue.
enhancement for sqlite, enable a "reverse Key" indexing method. Would this be
a simple change?
Ken
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Just a thought regarding this key issue.
enhancement for sqlite, enable a "reverse Key" indexing method. Would this be
a simple change?
Ken
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi
>Hi Ken,
>
>Thanks a lot.
>But this would require the key to be short. Will Check if this is
delete it!
*
- Original Message -
From: Ken
Date: Tuesday, July 3, 2007 0:46 am
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Re: In Mem Query Performance
> Timings:
>
> Calling Test Now
> TIME_ms=1210
> start=1183394494
> end=1183394496
>
> Calling Test Now
> TIME_ms=1164
> start=1183394504
>
Nachricht-
Von: RaghavendraK 70574 [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gesendet: Dienstag, 3. Juli 2007 12:12
An: sqlite-users@sqlite.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Betreff: Re: [sqlite] Re: In Mem Query Performance
Hi Ken,
Thanks a lot.
But this would require the key to be short. Will Check if this is acceptable
Hi
>Hi Ken,
>
>Thanks a lot.
>But this would require the key to be short. Will Check if this is
acceptable
>to all as we may not be able to port old db data if the key format is
changed.
>
Perhaps the key can be modified only for comparation. You store the
key as you want, but before compare
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Tuesday, July 3, 2007 0:46 am
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Re: In Mem Query Performance
> Timings:
>
> Calling Test Now
> TIME_ms=1210
> start=1183394494
> end=1183394496
>
> Calling Test Now
> TIME_ms=1164
> start=1183394504
> end=118
Timings:
Calling Test Now
TIME_ms=1210
start=1183394494
end=1183394496
Calling Test Now
TIME_ms=1164
start=1183394504
end=1183394505
(time in Ms is 1.2 and 1.1 ... )
Data generated using:
#include
#include
#include
#include
using namespace std;
int main()
{
At 12:16 02/07/2007, you wrote:
Hi,
Pls notify me if it can be brought down to 1 sec.
There is no mem constraint.
I don't know x86 asm or gcc for x86, but in powerpc asm, if i use
altivec libraries (libfreevec, f.e.) for string comparations, mem
moves/copies, sorts etc... i get from x2 to
> the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this e-
> mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email
> immediately and delete it!
>
> *************************
> - Original Message -
> From: Joe Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sunday, July 1, 2007 12:47 pm
> Subject: Re: [
ect: Re: [sqlite] Re: In Mem Query Performance
> In addition,
>
> - make a new index only on column1
> - move the prepare before the loop to avoid reparsing the SELECT
> each time
> - use sqlite3_bind_* and sqlite3_reset in the loop.
> - move finalize after the lo
than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this
e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and
delete it!
*
- Original Message -
From: "A. Pagaltzis&
In addition,
- make a new index only on column1
- move the prepare before the loop to avoid reparsing the SELECT each time
- use sqlite3_bind_* and sqlite3_reset in the loop.
- move finalize after the loop.
- query the test table directly - not the temporary ttest table.
- don't SELECT * if you
Your keys are too large and have the same leading characters.
Since the first hundred characters are the same you waste a lot
of CPU time in comparisons.
Try to get your total key size down to a fraction of that size.
At least change your program to generate keys of this form
instead and it
f the information contained herein in any way (including, but not
limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by
persons other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited. If you receive this
e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or emai
Hi RaghavendraK,
* RaghavendraK 70574 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-06-25 08:45]:
> When the DB is opened in "in Memory mode",performance of query
> does not improve. For table which has 10 columns of type Text
> and each column having 128bytes data and having a total of
> 1 records.
that is
18 matches
Mail list logo
