Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-15 Thread John Stanton
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joe Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- "D. Richard Hipp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Sorry for the confusion. No problem. For what it's worth, I am also curious as to the final form of the VM opcode transformation. The number of opcodes generated by the various SQL

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-14 Thread Bill KING
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Bill KING <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> A colleague brought up a very good point. At least for the first few >> revisions, is the old engine/code still going to be available until the >> new engine code base settles down? >> >> > > You can always pull the old c

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-14 Thread Nicolas Williams
On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 10:55:42AM -0600, Fred Williams wrote: > >Which means that if the major version number changes, > > then it'll be for marketing purposes. > > Well seeing how SQLite is FREE, it does its own "marketing" with one > word, so to speak. Therefore I doubt marketi

RE: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-14 Thread Fred Williams
> -Original Message- > From: Nicolas Williams [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, January 14, 2008 10:29 AM > To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org > Subject: Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite > > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2008 at 08:46:03PM -0600, Rick Langschultz wrote:

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-14 Thread Nicolas Williams
On Sun, Jan 13, 2008 at 08:46:03PM -0600, Rick Langschultz wrote: > I was wondering what would constitute the creation of SQLite 4.0? IMO major implementation details changes are not necessarily a good rationale for bumping the major version number, not from a user's p.o.v. The authors might think

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-14 Thread drh
Joe Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- "D. Richard Hipp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sorry for the confusion. > > No problem. > > For what it's worth, I am also curious as to the final form of the > VM opcode transformation. The number of opcodes generated by the various > SQL statement

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-14 Thread drh
Bill KING <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > A colleague brought up a very good point. At least for the first few > revisions, is the old engine/code still going to be available until the > new engine code base settles down? > You can always pull the old code frm CVS and run it against the newer code.

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-13 Thread Jim Dodgen
this was a true complement and nothing else. P Kishor wrote: On 1/13/08, Joe Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: --- "D. Richard Hipp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There are people on this mailing list (ex: Joe Wilson) who appear to read every line of every change that we make to SQLite, w

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-13 Thread Joe Wilson
--- "D. Richard Hipp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sorry for the confusion. No problem. For what it's worth, I am also curious as to the final form of the VM opcode transformation. The number of opcodes generated by the various SQL statements seems to be roughly the same as the old scheme. At t

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-13 Thread Roger Binns
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Rick Langschultz wrote: > I was wondering what would constitute the creation of SQLite 4.0? An incompatible API, or significant behaviour changes. > Since the VDBE is being revamped I would consider this a pretty big > revamp of the SQLite code. Th

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-13 Thread Bill KING
A colleague brought up a very good point. At least for the first few revisions, is the old engine/code still going to be available until the new engine code base settles down? (via #defines maybe?). It would lead towards a good chance of comparison between the two engines too for people. D. Richar

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-13 Thread Darren Duncan
At 8:46 PM -0600 1/13/08, Rick Langschultz wrote: I was wondering what would constitute the creation of SQLite 4.0? Since the VDBE is being revamped I would consider this a pretty big revamp of the SQLite code. I am looking forward to testing this out new engine out. I also wanted to know wh

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-13 Thread Rick Langschultz
I was wondering what would constitute the creation of SQLite 4.0? Since the VDBE is being revamped I would consider this a pretty big revamp of the SQLite code. I am looking forward to testing this out new engine out. I also wanted to know what the difference between stack based and regis

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-13 Thread D. Richard Hipp
On Jan 13, 2008, at 7:53 PM, Gerry Snyder wrote: Joe Wilson wrote: --- "D. Richard Hipp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There are people on this mailing list (ex: Joe Wilson) who appear to read every line of every change that we make to SQLite, within minutes of making them, and complain if w

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-13 Thread P Kishor
On 1/13/08, Joe Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- "D. Richard Hipp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There are people on this mailing list (ex: Joe Wilson) who appear > > to read every line of every change that we make to SQLite, within > > minutes of making them, and complain if we so much as

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-13 Thread Gerry Snyder
Joe Wilson wrote: --- "D. Richard Hipp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There are people on this mailing list (ex: Joe Wilson) who appear to read every line of every change that we make to SQLite, within minutes of making them, and complain if we so much as misspell a word in a comment. And I h

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-13 Thread Joe Wilson
--- "D. Richard Hipp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There are people on this mailing list (ex: Joe Wilson) who appear > to read every line of every change that we make to SQLite, within > minutes of making them, and complain if we so much as misspell a > word in a comment. And I haven't heard a

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-13 Thread D. Richard Hipp
On Jan 13, 2008, at 11:40 AM, Marco Bambini wrote: What will be the main benefits of the new virtual machine? Optimizations such as common subexpression elimination and moving subexpressions outside of inner loops will become much easier. The code generator will, in general, be easier to wo

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-13 Thread D. Richard Hipp
On Jan 13, 2008, at 11:31 AM, Rich Shepard wrote: On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Darren Duncan wrote: I would think something like that is worthy of a 3.6.0 version number. Not just a minor version increase that would be more suitable for minor changes or bugfixes. I agree with Darren that mass

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-13 Thread Marco Bambini
What will be the main benefits of the new virtual machine? I mean, it will be just faster or there will be other improvements in the library? --- Marco Bambini http://www.sqlabs.net http://www.sqlabs.net/blog/ http://www.sqlabs.net/realsqlserver/ On Jan 13, 2008, at 3:07 AM, D. Richard Hipp

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-13 Thread Rich Shepard
On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Darren Duncan wrote: I would think something like that is worthy of a 3.6.0 version number. Not just a minor version increase that would be more suitable for minor changes or bugfixes. I agree with Darren that massive changes to the core of the system should be reflecte

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-13 Thread Darren Duncan
At 9:07 PM -0500 1/12/08, D. Richard Hipp wrote: In case you haven't been watching the timeline (http://www.sqlite.org/cvstrac/timeline) we are in the middle of some major changes. The virtual machine inside of SQLite is being transformed from a stack-based machine into a register-based machine.

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-12 Thread Shawn Wilsher
On Jan 12, 2008 9:07 PM, D. Richard Hipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In case you haven't been watching the timeline > (http://www.sqlite.org/cvstrac/timeline) we are in the middle > of some major changes. The virtual machine inside of SQLite > is being transformed from a stack-based machine into a

Re: [sqlite] Next Version of SQLite

2008-01-12 Thread D. Richard Hipp
On Jan 12, 2008, at 7:55 PM, Shawn Wilsher wrote: Hey all, I was wondering when you plan on releasing the next version of SQLite. Mozilla is currently using 3.5.4, but that does not include some OS/2 fixes that were checked in after the release of 3.5.4. Instead of patching our local copy of