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

2004-04-09 Thread Nuno Lucas
=== On 2004-04-09, D. Richard Hipp wrote === .. > >The reason for not doing this is that maintenance of the counter >slows down inserts and deletes. Is having a constant-time count(*) >really work slower inserts and deletes? If you have opinions on >this, speak up now, because it won't be an opti

[sqlite] Norton AntiVirus conflict on Mac

2004-04-09 Thread James W. Walker
Maybe I'm the only one still using the classic Mac code path in SQLite, but for the record I'll describe a problem I had with Norton AntiVirus. It was causing sqliteOsDelete to fail with a file-busy error, presumably because NAV was checking the file for viruses, and then a subsequent attempt

Re: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-09 Thread Andrew Carter
Windows UTF-16 is represented by WCHAR. It is always 2 bytes. UCS-2 can be 3 or more bytes but these are for extended characters outside the ones used for real language. For example, musical notation symbols use the third byte. I don't think any OS's use UCS2 directly. I know Oracle supports U

Re: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-09 Thread Andrew Carter
I'm assuming UTF-8 support will still be there as well? For Windows applications, UTF-16 is much more prevalent. -- Andrew On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, Christian Smith wrote: > On Wed, 7 Apr 2004, D. Richard Hipp wrote: > > >A design proposal for SQLite version 3.0 can be found at: > > > > http://w

Re: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-09 Thread Doug Currie
Friday, April 9, 2004, 6:54:44 AM, D. Richard Hipp wrote: > Nuno Lucas wrote: > > I have a feature that would be nice in a 2.8.x version, but I can live with > > it if only on 3.0. It's the optimization for the many times used "SELECT > > COUNT(*) FROM ...", at least if FROM is a table or a vi

Re: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-09 Thread D. Richard Hipp
Nuno Lucas wrote: > I have a feature that would be nice in a 2.8.x version, but I can live with > it if only on 3.0. It's the optimization for the many times used "SELECT > COUNT(*) FROM ...", at least if FROM is a table or a view. > > I don't know exactly why it takes so much time, but if a file f

Re: [sqlite] A proposal for SQLite version 3.0

2004-04-09 Thread Nuno Lucas
Hi, I passed my eyes over the proposal and all seems ok to me (haven't made a through read yet, but I have total confidence on the good work of D. Richard Hipp). I have a feature that would be nice in a 2.8.x version, but I can live with it if only on 3.0. It's the optimization for the many times