Actually, doubt it's possible to use `content1_index` for ordering in your
case once `content` rows are filtered by the IN operator. Most probably the
index is just ignored here.
Do you get any measurable performance improvement with vs w/o it?
cheers,
-Original Message-
From: sqlite-us
Scott you can still set it up using setenv(Posix) or
_putenv_s_(Windows). Can't you?
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 10:23 AM, Scott Doctor wrote:
>
> Another issue to consider is security. Some programs, such as mine, needs to
> carefully control temporary files. Unless the user selects a specific
> dir
On 2015-08-20 07:44 AM, Anthrathodiyil, Sabeel (S.) wrote:
> Hi,
> I think there is ambiguity in the example I provided, I wouldn't need a
> ranking in my case as I need the offset (think row number is misleading) of
> the first record in the sorted list.
>
> Here is my use case.
> Find the ro
Try to rewrite the query like this
SELECT * FROM main
WHERE rowid IN (SELECT rowid FROM main WHERE main MATCH 'data')
ORDER BY udate
cheers,
-Original Message-
From: sqlite-users-boun...@mailinglists.sqlite.org
[mailto:sqlite-users-bounces at mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of David
Hi,
I fully understand that removing warnings and still staying portable is
hard.
I recently had my problems with removing warnings for C code from the
Visual Studio which is a nightmare since the C support of the Visual Studio
is really bad (mixed declarations only with MSVC >= 2013).
However in
On 20 Aug 2015 at 17:46, Scott Doctor wrote:
> My opinion is to keep it portable. The warning is there for a reason.
> you are worried about performance yet are calling a function that does
> nothing, which will take more memory cycles than a simple check for zero.
>
> Trying to memset a zero le
It's not a bug. It actually comes from the warning -Wmemset-transposed-args
which is active with -Wall and I had a short look that it seems to be that
there were several bugs with false positives for this warning and as far as
I can understand the gcc developers did not
rule out to issue the warnin
On Aug 20, 2015, at 5:27 AM, Steffen Mangold
wrote:
>
> What I want is to use the System.IO.Packaging.Package class to build a custom
> file format.
> Inside this a SQLite DB should be one System.IO.Packaging.PackagePart.
It seems to me that SQLite and this .NET hierarchy are both trying to do
Hi,
the problem is that this is a warning generated by the linker to warn the
user that
he potential swapped the arguments which it does since 0 occurs more often
on
the value side and memset(*,0,0) actually does nothing.
Cheers,
-Bernhard
2015-08-20 16:17 GMT+02:00 Scott Robison :
> I suspect
On 08/20/2015 12:38 PM, David Waters wrote:
> I have a large FTS4 table (around 200 million rows and growing). A simple
> query (SELECT * FROM main WHERE main MATCH 'data') returns in less than a
> second. However, if an ORDER BY is added (SELECT * FROM main WHERE main
> MATCH 'data' ORDER BY uda
I did. My last post was based off testing it live - it works beautifully.
Lighting quick and sorted without a temp B-TREE:
EXPLAIN QUERY PLAN is now:
SCAN TABLE content1 USING INDEX content1_index (~10 rows)
EXECUTE LIST SUBQUERY 1
SCAN TABLE main VIRTUAL TABLE INDEX 6: (~0 rows)
Dave
On
Thanks Dan and Vladimir. A combination of the two approaches is required.
I'll detail it here for future reference:
Using the sub query against the FTS table as suggested:
SELECT * FROM main
WHERE rowid IN (SELECT rowid FROM main WHERE main MATCH 'data')
ORDER BY udate
Still causes the USE TEMP
Hi,
the warning which is mentioned in the ticket
f51d9501800de5a0fb69d5048ce6662981b461ec still occurs also with newer gcc
versions. The ticket was closed after a gcc bug report was opened. The gcc
bug was closed due to a missing testcase.
I had a quick look at the problem and it seems that the wa
Steffen Mangold wrote:
>
> is there a proper way to open a SQLiteConnection from a Stream object?
>
That is not directly supported.
--
Joe Mistachkin
Hi,
is there a proper way to open a SQLiteConnection from a Stream object?
What I want is to use the System.IO.Packaging.Package class to build a custom
file format.
Inside this a SQLite DB should be one System.IO.Packaging.PackagePart.
I don't want to copy the DB part to temp directory every ti
On 8/20/15, Bernhard Schommer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the problem is that this is a warning generated by the linker to warn the
> user that
> he potential swapped the arguments which it does since 0 occurs more often
> on
> the value side and memset(*,0,0) actually does nothing.
>
My contention remains
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 10:46 AM, Scott Doctor
wrote:
> My opinion is to keep it portable. The warning is there for a reason. you
> are worried about performance yet are calling a function that does nothing,
> which will take more memory cycles than a simple check for zero.
>
I didn't say don't
But does the simple solution of an if statement negatively impact
performance? It may or may not, I really don't know. On the one hand, there
is the overhead of the check for the condition. On the other, it avoids
making a function call if the condition is false. On a third hand (I've run
out, some
On 8/20/15, Bernhard Schommer wrote:
> Hi,
>
> the warning which is mentioned in the ticket
> f51d9501800de5a0fb69d5048ce6662981b461ec still occurs also with newer gcc
> versions. The ticket was closed after a gcc bug report was opened. The gcc
> bug was closed due to a missing testcase.
> I had a
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 6:53 PM, Simon Slavin wrote:
> On 19 Aug 2015, at 10:46am, Paolo Bolzoni
> wrote:
> Just by itself, the above information is significant to the SQLite team.
> Perhaps when you have had a chance to confirm it a new thread can be started
> called 'SQLite database on ZFS
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Bernhard Schommer <
bernhardschommer at gmail.com> wrote:
> It's not a bug. It actually comes from the warning -Wmemset-transposed-args
> which is active with -Wall and I had a short look that it seems to be that
> there were several bugs with false positives for t
Sorry. I should have specified that that 'udate' is one of the indexed
columns of the FTS4 table main.
The goal is to do a FTS query and be able to ensure the results are ordered
the same each time (via the ORDER BY). It seemed at first to me that the
FTS index contains what is needed for the OR
My opinion is to keep it portable. The warning is there for a reason.
you are worried about performance yet are calling a function that does
nothing, which will take more memory cycles than a simple check for zero.
Trying to memset a zero length is a bug, not the warning. Add an if
statement ar
Yeah, we saw this with Chromium, too. The patch we use is below.
I'm with Dr Hipp that this is really more of a GCC issue. If it was
literally a 0 constant, it would make sense to warn so that the code can be
removed. But it's only a 0 if you optimize a certain way.
-scott
diff --git a/third
I suspect this is similar to another "recent" discussion about passing null
pointers to mem* library functions. C89 allowed zero or null. C99 seems to
forbid it. I'm going from memory here, can look at standards later if
desired
On Aug 20, 2015 8:08 AM, "Richard Hipp" wrote:
> On 8/20/15, Bernhar
On 20 Aug 2015, at 6:22am, Scott Perry wrote:
> That said, it's possible to corrupt a database by forcing the device to power
> off (by holding the power and home buttons) while SQLite's writes are in
> flight. This is equivalent to the conditions of a kernel panic.
This is true only if your
Hi,
I think there is ambiguity in the example I provided, I wouldn't need a ranking
in my case as I need the offset (think row number is misleading) of the first
record in the sorted list.
Here is my use case.
Find the rownumber 'y' (offset) for a name in the name table which starts with
give
I have a large FTS4 table (around 200 million rows and growing). A simple
query (SELECT * FROM main WHERE main MATCH 'data') returns in less than a
second. However, if an ORDER BY is added (SELECT * FROM main WHERE main
MATCH 'data' ORDER BY udate) it will never return (after 20 mins, I
canceled
On Aug 19, 2015, at 11:34 PM, Simon Slavin wrote:
>
>
> On 20 Aug 2015, at 6:22am, Scott Perry wrote:
>
>> That said, it's possible to corrupt a database by forcing the device to
>> power off (by holding the power and home buttons) while SQLite's writes are
>> in flight. This is equivalent t
29 matches
Mail list logo