Re: [sqlite] surprising behaviour: in-memory db allocs less than file db

Quoth Stephan Beal , on 2013-06-23 03:07:02 +0200: > file db: > ==16021== total heap usage: 856 allocs, 856 frees, 222,957 bytes allocated > > vs :memory: > ==16043== total heap usage: 832 allocs, 832 frees, 203,430 bytes allocated > > (Most of those allocs were done

[sqlite] surprising behaviour: in-memory db allocs less than file db

Hi, all, i just came across a curious behaviour and i'm interested to know what the reason for it is (it's not a bug): i have a very small test app with a tiny db (1 table, 2 records) where valgrind reports me using more memory (and more allocs) for a file-based db than the same :memory: db.

Re: [sqlite] How to interrupt a long running update without roll back?

Keith Medcalf wrote: > > I considered that as well, but it's not clear how much benefit you get > > over the autoincrement scheme: the PK-index is there either way, so > > that's not a slowdown. The split table approach also makes > > query-writing and indexing more complex, so at a minimum you'd

Re: [sqlite] False Error 'no such collation sequence'

> Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 21:23:20 +0300 > From: Bogdan Ureche > To: General Discussion of SQLite Database > Subject: Re: [sqlite] False Error 'no such collation sequence' > > You are mistaken. The free version of SQLite Expert supports loadable >

Re: [sqlite] How to interrupt a long running update without roll back?

> I considered that as well, but it's not clear how much benefit you get > over the autoincrement scheme: the PK-index is there either way, so > that's not a slowdown. The split table approach also makes > query-writing and indexing more complex, so at a minimum you'd probably > want to make a

Re: [sqlite] How to interrupt a long running update without roll back?

On 22 Jun 2013, at 10:50pm, Ryan Johnson wrote: > I considered that as well, but it's not clear how much benefit you get over > the autoincrement scheme: the PK-index is there either way, so that's not a > slowdown. The split table approach also makes

Re: [sqlite] How to interrupt a long running update without roll back?

On 21/06/2013 8:41 PM, Keith Medcalf wrote: No, in my case user does not touch the DB - he can only add or delete items, but all DB modifications are done by my app and I have a full control over all the values. All I need is to find the most efficient way to do that. Therefore, I do not

Re: [sqlite] unique id for table

Thanks very much Simon Looks like plan B then. On 22 June 2013 19:40, Simon Slavin wrote: > > On 22 Jun 2013, at 7:27pm, e-mail mgbg25171 > wrote: > > > I need to access a row just using numbers. > > The row id's fine but can I specify the

Re: [sqlite] unique id for table

On 22 Jun 2013, at 7:27pm, e-mail mgbg25171 wrote: > I need to access a row just using numbers. > The row id's fine but can I specify the table using a numeric id too? This command can be used to get tables numbered: SELECT rowid,name FROM sqlite_master WHERE

[sqlite] unique id for table

I need to access a row just using numbers. The row id's fine but can I specify the table using a numeric id too? If not I'll just create a look-up table so there's no problem. I'm just wondering... Any help much appreciated. ___ sqlite-users mailing list

Re: [sqlite] Newbie startup problems

Wenda, Clearly, in spite of you affirming having included the SQLite assembly in your references, the IDE isn't finding the SQLite package. If you say it's not a problem of "using ;" directive, then the reference must be pointing to a bad location (in this case it would get the standard

Re: [sqlite] Parallel accessing sqlite files in Win

On 22 Jun 2013, at 1:28pm, Lukas Haase wrote: > I use sqlite3_open_v2 with flag SQLITE_OPEN_READONLY to open an SQLite > database. When different processes access the same file (read-only) in > Win, can I be sure that there won't be any problems? Bees may eat your hat. Your

[sqlite] Parallel accessing sqlite files in Win

Hi, I use sqlite3_open_v2 with flag SQLITE_OPEN_READONLY to open an SQLite database. When different processes access the same file (read-only) in Win, can I be sure that there won't be any problems? Furthermore, I open another database with SQLITE_OPEN_READWRITE | SQLITE_OPEN_CREATE. When