On Sat, 2005-07-30 at 18:18 -0700, Cory Nelson wrote:
> something like sql server is likely better for the task. sqlite can
> lag quite a bit when it needs to get file locks over the network to
> stay atomic.
The point of this thread is that SQLite cannot be _atomic_ over [any]
networked filesyst
something like sql server is likely better for the task. sqlite can
lag quite a bit when it needs to get file locks over the network to
stay atomic.
On 7/28/05, djm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The documentation suggests that its unsafe to use SQLite when the
> database file is on a w
On Thu, 2005-07-28 at 11:28 +0200, djm wrote:
> Hello,
>
> The documentation suggests that its unsafe to use SQLite when the
> database file is on a windows network server and various other
> machines may want to simultaneously access it. If however none of
> these machines change the data in the
On Jul 30, 2005, at 8:22 AM, djm wrote:
Nobody?
Hello,
The documentation suggests that its unsafe to use SQLite when the
database file is on a windows network server and various other
machines may want to simultaneously access it. If however none of
these machines change the data in the da
Nobody?
> Hello,
> The documentation suggests that its unsafe to use SQLite when the
> database file is on a windows network server and various other
> machines may want to simultaneously access it. If however none of
> these machines change the data in the databse (all accesses are just
> querie
5 matches
Mail list logo
