Re: [sqlite] Date in gridview visualized in YYYY-MM-DD format:

as others have suggested you strftime('%d-%m-%Y', mytalbe.myfield) regards beppe On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 10:39 PM, Stefano Ravagni wrote: > Hello, i'm new in SQLite develop... > > i'n a gridview (.NET) i visualize the data type in -MM-DD format > > Using

Re: [sqlite] apparent column data type affected by numeric operation elsewhere

Hello, attached my build settings/patches if it helps, I added stuff for win Best. On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 10:15 AM, mm.w <0xcafef...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello ok thx, > > I currently use 3.8.3.1 amalgamation, I try to keep on official updates, I > have already mine to deal with > > Best. >

Re: [sqlite] apparent column data type affected by numeric operation elsewhere

Hello ok thx, I currently use 3.8.3.1 amalgamation, I try to keep on official updates, I have already mine to deal with Best. On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:07 PM, mm.w <0xcafef...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > is

Re: [sqlite] apparent column data type affected by numeric operation elsewhere

On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 1:07 PM, mm.w <0xcafef...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > is it fixed in 3.8.4.1 or only in the repo? > is that possible to add the date on the "Download Page" section? > It was fixed earlier this morning on trunk. You can download the latest sources from the website (see

Re: [sqlite] apparent column data type affected by numeric operation elsewhere

Hello, is it fixed in 3.8.4.1 or only in the repo? is that possible to add the date on the "Download Page" section? Best. On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 8:35 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > Also worked correctly in 3.8.2. Problem introduced in 3.8.3. Fixed here: >

Re: [sqlite] apparent column data type affected by numeric operation elsewhere

Also worked correctly in 3.8.2. Problem introduced in 3.8.3. Fixed here: http://www.sqlite.org/src/info/221f8f9447 On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 4:52 AM, Clemens Ladisch wrote: > Hi, > > it appears that SQLite thinks it can reuse a register even when > another operation

Re: [sqlite] How good is pragma integrity_check

On 24 Mar 2014, at 1:34pm, Tim Streater wrote: > My app does some periodic housekeeping, which includes occasional vacuuming > of some files. From the logs, I deduce that the OS completely lost this file > [1], which got recreated at the next housekeeping and then

Re: [sqlite] How good is pragma integrity_check

On 24 Mar 2014 at 08:36, Dominique Devienne wrote: > On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Roger Binns wrote: >> So you don't have to use it. Those of us who would rather proactively >> know about data corruption (to the best of SQLite's ability to

Re: [sqlite] How good is pragma integrity_check

On 24 Mar 2014, at 12:10pm, Markus Schaber wrote: > Not agreed. Another way to solve this problem is to include the file offset > or sector number into the checksum - this will also detect "movements" of > data to the wrong place, without the need for an atomically

Re: [sqlite] How good is pragma integrity_check

Hi, Simon, Von: sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org [mailto:sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org] > On 24 Mar 2014, at 5:23am, Roger Binns wrote: > > On 21/03/14 15:24, Simon Slavin wrote: > >> Checksums stored with the page index lists, > > > > SQLite already has the ability to

Re: [sqlite] How good is pragma integrity_check

On 24 Mar 2014, at 5:23am, Roger Binns wrote: > On 21/03/14 15:24, Simon Slavin wrote: >> Checksums stored with the page index lists, > > SQLite already has the ability to carve out data on each page for other > uses. For example the encryption extension uses this.

Re: [sqlite] Message: 9 Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 T Problem with Update from associated table.

Thanks Keith Medcalf. Your solution solves my problem. I don't know at what stage my brain lost contact with reality, but I bounded off into fields of increasing complexity rather than pausing and regrouping. After 45+ years developing systems I still fall for this devilish plunge. Updating

[sqlite] apparent column data type affected by numeric operation elsewhere

Hi, it appears that SQLite thinks it can reuse a register even when another operation changes it by applying numeric affinity: > create table t(x); > insert into t values('1'); > select typeof(x) from t where x=x; text > select typeof(x) from t where x=x+0; integer (first reported here:

Re: [sqlite] How good is pragma integrity_check

On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 6:23 AM, Roger Binns wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > On 21/03/14 15:24, Simon Slavin wrote: >> Checksums stored with the page index lists, > > SQLite already has the ability to carve out data on each page for other > uses. For example

Re: [sqlite] Why is SQLite refusing to use available indexes when adding a JOIN?

Ofer Sadgat wrote: > Why is SQLite refusing to use available indexes when adding a JOIN? > > CREATE VIEW baz AS SELECT id FROM foo UNION ALL SELECT id FROM bar; > > SELECT * FROM baz LEFT JOIN bam ON baz.id=bam.id WHERE baz.id IN ('123', > '234'); In the current SQLite version, the compound