How to rollback current transaction?
Pavel Ivanov-2 wrote:
>
>> I assume you want the sqllite3_stmt to work -- so you need to loop that
>> while it's busy.
>
> Michael, don't give bad advices.
> The most general advice when one gets SQLITE_BUSY is to reset/finalize
> all statements and roll
I mentioned a while back that .import can be made to work with
flexible number columns by setting a mode that says 'ignore column
error on import'. The idea is that SQLite can import from csv files
where the number of columns is not known.
I looked that the code for import. If there was a column
Hello,
It seems that composite FK are not enforced on SQLite 3.6.23.1.
The following script shows that the DELETE FROM table "artist" will work, even
though
there is a composite FK from table "track" toward table "artist".
PRAGMA foreign_keys = ON;
CREATE TABLE artist(
artistidINTEGER PR
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/13/2010 12:22 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> Where can I find the corresponding ticket? The sqlite homepage seems to
> have lost all references to the bug tracker... I know that bug reporting is
> no longer open to the public, but I hope there is sti
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/13/2010 12:56 PM, Pavel Ivanov wrote:
> Roger, '-g' flag doesn't necessarily mean SQLITE_DEBUG turned on and
> doesn't mean all debugging stuff turned on. This flag (if we're
> talking about gcc)
We aren't talking about gcc, but rather Python's
>> Correct. Also, it only happens when apsw is compiled with -g.
>
> The amalgamation is being used when you compiled APSW. When you compile
> APSW with debug and the amalgamation, two things happen. Firstly assertions
> are turned on in both APSW and SQLite.
> ...
> Secondly it enables SQLITE_DE
Done!
Index: ext/csv/csv.c
===
--- ext/csv/csv.c
+++ ext/csv/csv.c
@@ -60,10 +60,11 @@
char *zRow; /* Buffer for current CSV row */
char cDelim; /* Character to use for delimiting columns
*/
i
Roger Binns writes:
> On 05/13/2010 06:43 AM, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
>> Yeah, I'm around. I don't know what an "exact disassembly" is or how to
>> provide one, but if someone tells me what to do then I'm most likely
>> willing to do it.
>
> We can test the hypothesis very easily. Find line 15472 in
> Perhaps SQLite should have a no-nonsense approach to this issue and
> introduce some determinism, even in a primitive way. I find it worst
> than unfair, as the waiting process can do absolutely nothing against
> the situation where it is "ignored".
Unfortunately it's impossible to do that usin
>The Minimal-Perfect-Hash-INTERSECTION-OF-VECTORS approach might benefit
>queries against tables having several million rows. What I'm wondering
>(and
>lack the C skills to find out for myself) is whether SQLite's underlying
>algorithms for INTERSECT could be optimized with a minimal perfect hash
> > In my low-concurrency, familly-business context, I have no problem at
> > all setting 3 hours timeout using the built-in function, when the
> > slowest transaction may only take less than 5 minutes.
>
>With this condition as a 4th one in your list and with 5th one stating
>that you have less t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/13/2010 06:43 AM, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> Yeah, I'm around. I don't know what an "exact disassembly" is or how to
> provide one, but if someone tells me what to do then I'm most likely
> willing to do it.
We can test the hypothesis very easily.
> In my low-concurrency, familly-business context, I have no problem at
> all setting 3 hours timeout using the built-in function, when the
> slowest transaction may only take less than 5 minutes.
With this condition as a 4th one in your list and with 5th one stating
that you have less than 30 slo
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 10:49:48AM -0400, Pavel Ivanov scratched on the wall:
> > ?You have three basic conditions, and they're all AND'ed together.
> > ?Just build an index that each condition can walk through.
> >
> > ?Or am I missing something? ?I know there are some odd rules about how
> > ?SQL
Let me take a reality check for the case of my own usage. If I
guarantee that the following conditions are all true:
All R^n (Read-Read-...-Read) atomic operations are enclosed in BEGIN
transactions.
All W^n (Write-Write-...-Write) and RMW (Read-Modify-Write) atomic
operations are enclosed i
> You have three basic conditions, and they're all AND'ed together.
> Just build an index that each condition can walk through.
>
> Or am I missing something? I know there are some odd rules about how
> SQLite will use (or won't use) indexes for greater-than/less-than
> conditions, but I don'
Roger Binns writes:
>> Although I see that it can return false in this case if another thread
>> is inside pthreadMutexEnter and optimizer has switched order of
>> assignment of the values to owner and nRef inside pthreadMutexEnter
>> (it is allowed to do so because variables are not volatile). Is
On Wed, May 12, 2010 at 06:00:29PM +0200, Jan Asselman scratched on the wall:
> Hi,
>
> Given the following table with large row count 'row_count':
>
> CREATE TABLE table
> (
> i_name TEXT,
> i_from INTEGER,
> i_toINTEGER,
> i_data BLOB
> )
>
> I
I hope that you know that
sprintf(sql, "SELECT count(*) FROM table1;");
is not a going to give you count(*) FROM table1.
Where is your real query?
From: Prajeed chathuar
To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
Sent: Thu, May 13, 2010 4:10:01 AM
Subject: [sqlite] API not
> So as long as you're in the simple case (e.g. doing a simple SELECT while
> another process INSERTs). you should never see a deadlock, correct?
Yes, as long as you don't use transactions, or your transactions are
homogeneous (in terms of using only SELECTs or only
INSERTs/UPDATEs/DELETEs), or a
OK...so after reading that it sounds like the situation you need to avoid is a
deadlock.
So as long as you're in the simple case (e.g. doing a simple SELECT while
another process INSERTs). you should never see a deadlock, correct?
And the explanation would seem to indicate this:
sqlite3_busy_
> Hmmm...bad assumption on my partseems so logical that if it's busy just
> try again -- and that idea worked on Liubin's problem.
Read 4th paragraph from here
http://www.sqlite.org/c3ref/busy_handler.html ("The presence of a busy
handler ...") and see why it's not a good idea to always wait
Hmmm...bad assumption on my partseems so logical that if it's busy just try
again -- and that idea worked on Liubin's problem. I see this
http://www.sqlite.org/c3ref/stmt.html -- but it doesn't quite address the BUSY
condition.
I also found this thread
http://www.mail-archive.com/sqlite-u
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 12:07:50AM -0700, liubin liu scratched on the wall:
>
> I see many SQLITE_BUSY returned from sqlite3_finalize(). Are they memory leak
> because it don't succeed in finalizing the sqlite3_stmt pointer?
It sounds like you're using using sqlite3_prepare() rather than
sqli
> I assume you want the sqllite3_stmt to work -- so you need to loop that while
> it's busy.
Michael, don't give bad advices.
The most general advice when one gets SQLITE_BUSY is to reset/finalize
all statements and rollback current transaction. It's only in certain
type of transactions and certa
It also means you're not handling the SQLITE_BUSY from the sqlite3_stmt()
before it.
I assume you want the sqllite3_stmt to work -- so you need to loop that while
it's busy.
Michael D. Black
Senior Scientist
Northrop Grumman Mission Systems
From: sqlite-user
Right, Jean-Christophe, about "moving too much data around". You'd want each
of the inner selects to produce a vector of integer ids. "select *" is
clearly not going to be very efficient. 200K rows is a very small table for
this sort of test, in my view. Were the faster intereections any faster
t
>> > What is the Query to get the updates from the table (updated (added,
>> edited,
>> > deleted row information) rows from last 5 mins/1 hour/5 hours/24 hours.)
If you don't store change timestamp of the row by yourself then
there's no way to know when the row was last changed.
Pavel
On Thu,
sqlite3_finalize (as well as sqlite3_reset) return SQLITE_BUSY only
when sqlite3_stmt returned SQLITE_BUSY before that. It doesn't mean
error of any kind or memory leak - sqlite3_finalize still did its job
successfully and freed all resources it had to release.
Pavel
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 3:07
On 13 May 2010 10:10, Prajeed chathuar wrote:
> Hi
> I am a sotware trainee of Bangalore,India base company...i am working for
> the first time in sqlite data baase..
> I am trying sqlite and vc++ for last one week iam not getting correct
> output.there is no linking and compiling error but no
thanks for reply
before also i have seen through this link... but I din't get any answer to
my question in this link
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 3:38 PM, Simon Slavin wrote:
>
> On 13 May 2010, at 10:20am, Meenakshi Yakri wrote:
>
> > Hi wanted to check
> > What is the Query to get the updates from
On 13 May 2010, at 10:20am, Meenakshi Yakri wrote:
> Hi wanted to check
> What is the Query to get the updates from the table (updated (added, edited,
> deleted row information) rows from last 5 mins/1 hour/5 hours/24 hours.)
http://www.sqlite.org/lang_datefunc.html
See the 'Modifiers' section.
Hi wanted to check
What is the Query to get the updates from the table (updated (added, edited,
deleted row information) rows from last 5 mins/1 hour/5 hours/24 hours.)
like for example
SELECT * FROM ORDERS
WHERE ROW CHANGE TIMESTAMP FOR ORDERS >
CURRENT TIMSTAMP - 24 HOURS;
returns all the rows
Hi
I am a sotware trainee of Bangalore,India base company...i am working for
the first time in sqlite data baase..
I am trying sqlite and vc++ for last one week iam not getting correct
output.there is no linking and compiling error but not getting correct
output: here is the code
int sqlresu
Hello everyone,
I am sorry if I might be placing this problem on a wrong forum, but after
googling several hours in vain, this is my only solution for the problem I
am experiencing.
I am implementing the persistence layer with NHibernate and SQLite. I am
building dinamically the session configs:
I see many SQLITE_BUSY returned from sqlite3_finalize(). Are they memory leak
because it don't succeed in finalizing the sqlite3_stmt pointer?
Black, Michael (IS) wrote:
>
> SQLITE_BUSY is not an error...just a fact.
>
> All your processes cannot work on the database at the same time...at l
36 matches
Mail list logo
