RE: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-07 Thread Fred Williams
Null is not a value. The definition of NULL is that a value has not been assigned and is therefore unknown. Once a value is assigned, Null is no longer valid. Unless somebody changed the definition in the last thirty years or so :-) > -Original Message- > From: Tom Shafer

[sqlite] Clustered indicies Was: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-07 Thread ben . carlyle
Jeff, Jeff Pleimling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 08/04/2004 12:42 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:Re: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0 At 12:08 PM 4/8/2004 +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I believe you're thinking of a 'clustered index'. This

Re: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-07 Thread Jeff Pleimling
At 12:08 PM 4/8/2004 +1000, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A little while ago a list reader suggested a kind of index (from ms access, if I recall... I don't recall the term they used) that is not external. Instead the index changes the order in which the table itself is organised. I believe you're

[sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-07 Thread Tom Shafer
Vote for a database parameter:IS NULL A VALUE ? YES or NO - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-07 Thread ben . carlyle
Peoples :) "D. Richard Hipp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 07/04/2004 11:22 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] cc: Subject:[sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0 > A design proposal for SQLite version 3.0 can be found at: > http://www.sqlite.org/prop2.html >

Re: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-07 Thread D. Richard Hipp
Darren Duncan wrote: Here are some of the things I like (correct me if any actually not present): Your summary looks very good. Thanks you. - SQL strings given to prepare() can have "?" placeholders for inspecific literals to fill in later with bind() functions. VERY VALUABLE. - Actual blobs

Re: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-07 Thread D. Richard Hipp
eno wrote: well, the question is: Support UTF-16 to what extent? I think here of sorting questions, (but other may arise). Obviously, sorting within a single language is specific to that language, whereas sorting a, say, german word with an ukrainian word is what a programmer calls

Re: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-07 Thread Darren Duncan
At 9:22 AM -0400 4/7/04, D. Richard Hipp wrote: A design proposal for SQLite version 3.0 can be found at: http://www.sqlite.org/prop2.html Feedback from the user community is strongly encouraged. Hey, this looks great! Here are some of the things I like (correct me if any actually not

Re: Fw: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-07 Thread Mateusz Łoskot
In 04/08/2004 05:38 AM, Roy Black wrote: I have no clue how Jakub Adamek gets 3x bigger files than MS Access. I always get 2x less. How is it possible ? My opinion is closer (but not exact) to Jakub's. I have 3 databases, each database has the same structure (about 100 tables) but different amount

Re: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-07 Thread Simon Berthiaume
It might be true if you mostly store large quantities of NUMERICAL data (float, int, ...) since they are currently stored as strings (the value 1234567, would be stored using at least 7-8 bytes instead of 4). If you were in the same situation as I, where I use database mostly for strings, you

RE: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-07 Thread Steve O'Hara
Wouldn't this be due to SQLite storing everything as strings? If your database is predominantly numbers then I imagine the differences between Access and SQLite could be huge. Steve -Original Message- From: Roy Black [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 08 April 2004 04:38 To: [EMAIL

RE: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-07 Thread Allan Edwards
Yes, things are very tight on all of our products over here as well! I would like to know what causes a bloated file. Thanks, Allan http://www.aspire.ws http://store.aspire.ws -Original Message- From: Roy Black [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 10:38 PM To:

Fw: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-07 Thread Roy Black
I have no clue how Jakub Adamek gets 3x bigger files than MS Access. I always get 2x less. - Original Message - From: "D. Richard Hipp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Jakub Adamek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, April 07, 2004 9:10 AM Subject: Re: [sqlite] A

Re: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-07 Thread D. Richard Hipp
Simon Berthiaume wrote: >> Notice that text strings are always transferred as type "char*" even if the text representation is UTF-16. This might force users to explicitely type cast some calls to function to avoir warnings. I would prefer UNICODE neutral functions that can take either one of

Re: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-07 Thread Christian Smith
On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, D. Richard Hipp wrote: >A design proposal for SQLite version 3.0 can be found at: > > http://www.sqlite.org/prop2.html > >Feedback from the user community is strongly encouraged. >An executive summary of the proposed changes follows: > >* Support for UTF-16 > >I do

Re: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-07 Thread Jakub Adamek
Hello, I am using SQLite in a car navigation system which should work on PDAs as well. Thus speed and size is crucial for us. SQLite is superb in the speed category, but the size of its file is not so superb. I see you mentioned something about file size. My experience is that SQLite makes

Re: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-07 Thread aducom
As a developer of Delphi components for SQLite I would recommend a new function for both releases to investigate the fileversion. Perhaps it's already there. Of course you can open a database and wait for an exception to occur, but this is not a very clean way of doing things. Having this