On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 21:38 -0700, Richard Klein wrote:
> As I was thinking about the locking mechanism in SQLite 3,
> it occurred to me that the following race condition could
> occur.
>
> Imagine a joint bank account with a balance of $10,000.
> The wife makes a withdrawal of $1,000 at ATM 'A'
> I do not understand why lemon waits for one more token when it has
> enough information to reduce
...
>
> >>> I don't think you can. Why do you want to? Why not just go
> >>> ahead and send it the next token?
> >>>
> >> Most people find a way around this problem using
What is the difference between :
1/ userid UNSIGNED INTEGER PRIMARY KEY AUTOINCREMENT
NOT NULL
2/ userid INTEGER PRIMARY KEY AUTOINCREMENT NOT NULL
CHECK (userid>0)
--- David Nguyen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> With php, I want to create 2 tables, userid is a
> primary key
Richard Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Process A
-
BEGIN TRANSACTION;
SELECT balance FROM accounts WHERE accountId = '123-45-6789';
UPDATE accounts SET balance =
WHERE accountId = '123-45-6789';
COMMIT;
Process B
-
BEGIN TRANSACTION;
SELECT balance FROM
Complexity of the schema affects time required to open a connection since
the schema has to be read and processed. With about 70 tables each with
lots of indexes and triggers, it takes us 17ms to open the connection.
HTH,
Sam
---
We're Hiring! Seeking
Here's a bit more locking info that I found useful to help understand it
all out of the archives:
http://www.mail-archive.com/sqlite-users@sqlite.org/msg02845.html
If you are writing a Windows app, you can use a named mutex which can be
shared across processes.
I have need for a blocking
Can cache and page size configuration improve or worsen the situation?
regards
ragha
**
This email and its attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI,
which is intended only for the person or
Guys,
I read this forum regularly and I've given a lot of thought to all of
these conversations about low level logic and trying to squeeze the last
ounce of performance out of SQLite.
That's not for me. Simplicity equates to robustness and my company needs
robustness. And my time is really
A classic solution to that problem is not to perform updates but to
insert transactions, The concept of log file systems to give
concurrency is worth scrutiny.
Richard Klein wrote:
As I was thinking about the locking mechanism in SQLite 3,
it occurred to me that the following race condition
You make a sound point. From my perspective the Sqlite synchronization
mechanisms are a flawed part of an otherwise elegantly simple design, as
reading this forum indicates. Synchronization problems are the major
item of confusion among users. A more robust and less intricate
interface
Dear all,
my aim is to aggregate some data. To be more specific: I have a table 'mytable'
with variables a, b, c, and ctr. The values for variable ctr are all 1
(individual level data in the raw format).
If I want to know how many people with the same covariate setting
there are, I used the
The thing is, SQLite's synchronization mechanism is simpler than most
full-featured SQL databases. In all cases, the point is that if you
are attempting to do simultaneous writes from two connections, each
connection must be prepared to receive an error, rollback the
transaction, and try again.
Lee Crain wrote:
I've wrapped all of my company's SQLite database accesses in my own API
layer that encapsulates all of our applications' business rules and forces
ALL transactions, no matter how lengthy or trivial, to be atomic by using
a MUTEX to avoid the types of scenarios described below.
Trevor Talbot wrote:
The thing is, SQLite's synchronization mechanism is simpler than most
full-featured SQL databases. In all cases, the point is that if you
are attempting to do simultaneous writes from two connections, each
connection must be prepared to receive an error, rollback the
Rafi Cohen wrote:
Hi, I've written an application in C that integrates sqlite-3.3.12. Up
to now for months everything was running fast and smooth.
Now, I installed sqlite3 and compiled my application on a different
computer.
The installations were ok, but upon activating my application, it quits
Dan Kennedy wrote:
On Wed, 2007-10-24 at 21:38 -0700, Richard Klein wrote:
As I was thinking about the locking mechanism in SQLite 3,
it occurred to me that the following race condition could
occur.
Imagine a joint bank account with a balance of $10,000.
The wife makes a withdrawal of $1,000
I am sure that you are correct, that Sqlite's sync mechanism is not
terribly complicated for you and for anyone else who understands the
principles, however it does confuse many users as you see from the
posts to this forum. Simple to use could become simpler to use.
Synchronizing
On 10/25/07, Richard Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Trevor Talbot wrote:
> > The thing is, SQLite's synchronization mechanism is simpler than most
> > full-featured SQL databases. In all cases, the point is that if you
> > are attempting to do simultaneous writes from two connections, each
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Ken [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2007 1:22 PM
> To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
> Subject: RE: [sqlite] Re: Some Questions Regarding Access To a SQLite
> Database By More Than One Process
>
> If you are using seperate processes then a
Trevor Talbot wrote:
On 10/25/07, Richard Klein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Trevor Talbot wrote:
The thing is, SQLite's synchronization mechanism is simpler than most
full-featured SQL databases. In all cases, the point is that if you
are attempting to do simultaneous writes from two
Hi all,
I need small help regarding software .Acutually my application was
developed in SQLite2.1 by some body now i need SQLite2.1 version.Actually I
found SQLite3 version but by using this software i am unable to run my
application.please let me know from which site i can get SQLite2.1
21 matches
Mail list logo
