[sqlite] SQLite Version 3.7.1

SQLite version 3.7.1 is now available on the SQLite website: http://www.sqlite.org/ Version 3.7.1 features improved memory usage reporting abilities, improved index utilization on LIKE and GLOB operators, an increase in the maximum database page size to 64KiB, and a new sqlite3_file_control()

Re: [sqlite] What is the most efficient way to gettheclosebynumbers?

On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 4:25 PM, ve3meo wrote: > "Simon Slavin" ... >> >>> Here's how I have interpreted Simon's suggested chunky query: >>> >>> select * from A as A1, A as A2 where A1.name=A2.name and >>> A1.position != A2.position and >>> A2.chunk between A1.chunk -

Re: [sqlite] 5000 tables with 3000 records vs 1 table with 15000000records

On 22 Aug 2010, at 6:34pm, ve3meo wrote: > A master database with pointers to > each of the stock databases, ATTACH as many as you want to view at one time, > maybe combine data into temporary table(s), create and drop indexes on the > fly thus keeping storage at a minimum. I was going to

Re: [sqlite] 5000 tables with 3000 records vs 1 table with 15000000records

"Mike Zang" ... > In fact, the file is stock data and one file is for one stock, so they are > all in the same format. > > Then, in most case, only one stock should be selected. > Then, from a 'disk' operating system and memory management perspective, wouldn't one file per stock continue to be

Re: [sqlite] What is the most efficient way to get the close bynumbers?

"Peng Yu" ... >> I think the penalty is in the extra JOIN required - 3 tables instead of >> 2 - >> with the speed advantage on the 'between' constraint being swamped by the >> volume of intermediate rows. > > I don't quite understand why there are 3 tables with R-tree. Would you > please show me

Re: [sqlite] EXTERNAL:Re: What is the most efficient way to gettheclosebynumbers?

My first reaction to all this was...why use SQL to do this? Then after I saw 333450 results I was wondering if that was accurate. Out of 10,000 records there should be 384.62 average name matches The odds of being < 10 with 0-99 position is approx 1*.1 This gives us 384.62*(1-384.62)*0.1

Re: [sqlite] sqlite documents in pdf format

Hi, Just for the benefit of everybody using sqlite3. I made a pdf file for the document on the website (using htmldoc, none relevant pages removed). http://rapidshare.com/files/414401016/sqlite3_doc.pdf BTW, the document on sqlite website seems a little disorganized. From the docs.html file, I

Re: [sqlite] What is the most efficient way to gettheclosebynumbers?

On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 7:53 AM, ve3meo wrote: > > "Simon Slavin" ... >> >> By the way, you might find that swapping the last two lines makes it >> faster: >> >> >>> select * from A as A1, A as A2 where A1.name=A2.name and >>> A2.position between A1.position - 10 and

Re: [sqlite] What is the most efficient way to get the close by numbers?

On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 10:45 PM, ve3meo wrote: > "Eric Smith" ... >> I haven't used it myself, but I'm pretty sure this is what the R*tree >> module was designed for: > > I have not used it either but was intrigued by your suggestion. Looking into > it, my sense was

Re: [sqlite] 5000 tables with 3000 records vs 1 table with 15000000 records

See tests for 100 millions records in single table: http://book.mobigroup.ru/dir?name=web_project_DBMS/distributed_schema And see http://geomapx.blogspot.com/2009/11/postgresql-81-vs-sqlite-3620-in-real.html http://geomapx.blogspot.com/2009/09/sqlite-3617-mobigroup2.html Old versions of SQLite

Re: [sqlite] 5000 tables with 3000 records vs 1 table with 15000000 records

On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 4:51 AM, Mike Zang wrote: > I have 5000 files and I want to converrt them to SQLite3 on iPad, now I > have a performance question, I am not sure which way is better for select > and insert data in SQLite3. > > I have  two ideas for converting. > > 1.

Re: [sqlite] 5000 tables with 3000 records vs 1 table with 15000000 records

Thanks for your reply. In fact, the file is stock data and one file is for one stock, so they are all in the same format. Then, in most case, only one stock should be selected. --- Drake Wilson wrote: > Quoth Mike Zang , on 2010-08-22 17:51:05 +0900:

Re: [sqlite] 5000 tables with 3000 records vs 1 table with 15000000 records

Quoth Mike Zang , on 2010-08-22 17:51:05 +0900: > I have two ideas for converting. > > 1. convert 1 file to 1 table, so that I will have about 5000 tables in > SQLIte3 database, and any file will have about 3000 records. > > 2. convert all 5000 files to 1 table, there will

[sqlite] 5000 tables with 3000 records vs 1 table with 15000000 records

I have 5000 files and I want to converrt them to SQLite3 on iPad, now I have a performance question, I am not sure which way is better for select and insert data in SQLite3. I have two ideas for converting. 1. convert 1 file to 1 table, so that I will have about 5000 tables in SQLIte3 database,