"Zbigniew Baniewski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 09:42:56PM +0100, Seun Osewa wrote:
>
>> You need FTS3:
>> http://www.sqlite.org/cvstrac/wiki?p=FtsUsage
>> It comes with the command line version of SQLite 3.6
>
> You mean: it won't work
On 9/22/08, Zbigniew Baniewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 12:17:44PM +1000, BareFeet wrote:
>
> > select exists (select 1 from MyTable where condition)
> >
> > which will return a boolean result, and stop scanning the table after
> > the first match is found.
>
>
>
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 09:42:56PM +0100, Seun Osewa wrote:
> You need FTS3:
> http://www.sqlite.org/cvstrac/wiki?p=FtsUsage
> It comes with the command line version of SQLite 3.6
You mean: it won't work using SQLite's module for TCL?
--
pozdrawiam / regards
You need FTS3:
http://www.sqlite.org/cvstrac/wiki?p=FtsUsage
It comes with the command line version of SQLite 3.6
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 8:43 PM, Zbigniew Baniewski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 07:50:23PM -0400, Igor Tandetnik wrote:
>
> > > although not always I want
On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 07:50:23PM -0400, Igor Tandetnik wrote:
> > although not always I want
> > to fetch all that data. Sometimes I would just to count it.
>
> Don't call sqlite3_column_*. Just call sqlite3_step in a loop. But
> again, if you want to get a count of records, you are unlikely
On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 07:07:33PM -0500, Jay A. Kreibich wrote:
> It sounds like you need to take a more general approach to speeding
> up your queries. If you've not yet looked at building appropriate
> indexes, that seems like a good place to start.
Right, proper indexing gives
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 12:17:44PM +1000, BareFeet wrote:
> select exists (select 1 from MyTable where condition)
>
> which will return a boolean result, and stop scanning the table after
> the first match is found.
Yes, thanks - that's right: it is partial solution indeed. "Partial" -
>> I was using count(*) just to detect the presence of any record
>> meeting given condition. Is it possible to make
>> it fast _not_ using count(*)? I need just a "boolean result" of 1/0
>> (yes, there is at least one / there aren't any).
>>
> Add limit 1 to the query, so that it
Zbigniew Baniewski wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 05:22:46PM -0500, Jay A. Kreibich wrote:
>
>
>> count(*) is an odd one... In most database systems it is extremely
>> fast, but in SQLite it tends to be rather slow.
>>
>
> I forgot the important thing: usually I was using count(*)
On Mon, Sep 22, 2008 at 01:13:30AM +0200, Zbigniew Baniewski scratched on the
wall:
> On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 05:22:46PM -0500, Jay A. Kreibich wrote:
>
> > count(*) is an odd one... In most database systems it is extremely
> > fast, but in SQLite it tends to be rather slow.
> > [..]
> >
"Zbigniew Baniewski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> The problem is, that it's not only about global number of records - I
> would to have a possibility to quickly count number of records found
> by conditional queries like: "select count(*) from table where
> ".
On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 05:22:46PM -0500, Jay A. Kreibich wrote:
> count(*) is an odd one... In most database systems it is extremely
> fast, but in SQLite it tends to be rather slow.
I forgot the important thing: usually I was using count(*) just to detect
the presence of any record
On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 05:22:46PM -0500, Jay A. Kreibich wrote:
> count(*) is an odd one... In most database systems it is extremely
> fast, but in SQLite it tends to be rather slow.
> [..]
> If you search the archives, you'll find many discussions on the best
> way to create a system
I've created a test database with almost one million records (about 20 fields
each). I noticed, that the simple query like "select count(*) from table"
takes about 10 seconds (the database file is of about 300 MB size).
I'm wondering: is it the limit - or is it still possible to reduce the
14 matches
Mail list logo
