On Oct 26, 2009, at 6:16 PM, D. Richard Hipp wrote:
>
> The memory management has undergone multiple rewrites in the previous
> two years, but as far as we know, sqlite3_release_memory() still works
> as advertised. Please let us know if you find otherwise.
FWIW, with the latest changes we now h
On Oct 26, 2009, at 5:53 PM, Peter Kasting wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 2:48 PM, D. Richard Hipp
> wrote:
>
>> On Oct 26, 2009, at 5:00 PM, Peter Kasting wrote:
>>> as
>>> far as
>>> I can tell the current code shouldn't cause any performance hit by
>>> enabling
>>> this flag. There's no
On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 2:48 PM, D. Richard Hipp wrote:
> On Oct 26, 2009, at 5:00 PM, Peter Kasting wrote:
> > as
> > far as
> > I can tell the current code shouldn't cause any performance hit by
> > enabling
> > this flag. There's no additional monitoring/tracking it causes; it
> > just
> > ex
On Oct 26, 2009, at 5:00 PM, Peter Kasting wrote:
> Close to two years ago, Shawn Wilsher from Mozilla asked about freeing
> memory used by sqlite (
> http://www.mail-archive.com/sqlite-users@sqlite.org/
> msg30585.html ). At the
> time, some benchmarks showed that setting
> -DSQLITE_ENABLE_MEM
Close to two years ago, Shawn Wilsher from Mozilla asked about freeing
memory used by sqlite (
http://www.mail-archive.com/sqlite-users@sqlite.org/msg30585.html ). At the
time, some benchmarks showed that setting
-DSQLITE_ENABLE_MEMORY_MANAGEMENT=1 caused a small performance hit.
I'm looking into
5 matches
Mail list logo
