2016-04-16 21:44 GMT+02:00 Rob Willett :
> If you have a load average of 15 then that normally means you have a
> massively overloaded Linux box. I don?t know your system but I get worried
> around a load average of 3-4 on our boxes. Load Average is a very crude
> measurement but a high number ten
2016-04-16 20:36 GMT+02:00 R Smith :
>
>
> On 2016/04/16 3:39 PM, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
>
>> 2016-04-16 14:52 GMT+02:00 R Smith :
>>
>> Let me try the 100 million rows, this may take some time - I will post
>>> again when it is done.
>>>
>>> ?I am curious.
>>
>
> Well, here it is then, 100-millio
Cecil,
If you have a load average of 15 then that normally means you have a
massively overloaded Linux box. I don?t know your system but I get
worried around a load average of 3-4 on our boxes. Load Average is a
very crude measurement but a high number tends to be bad.
If your CPU is only runn
On 16 Apr 2016, at 8:25pm, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> I am filling the database again, but now with text UUID instead of blob
> UUID. That takes a ?little? more time. When it is filled I try again.
I assume you're doing many INSERT commands between BEGIN and END.
> Have another problem also. My
On 2016/04/16 3:39 PM, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> 2016-04-16 14:52 GMT+02:00 R Smith :
>
>> Let me try the 100 million rows, this may take some time - I will post
>> again when it is done.
>>
> ?I am curious.
Well, here it is then, 100-million rows: The INSERT took a lot of time,
near 5 hours, bu
> Have another problem also. My CPU is about 15%, but the load average is
> also about 15. (This is on a Linux system.) This results (sometimes) in a
> very sluggish system. Can the load be a SQLite problem, or is it a Java
> problem? (When the program is not running, the load average is a lot
> lo
2016-04-16 16:19 GMT+02:00 R Smith :
>
>
> On 2016/04/16 4:09 PM, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
>
>> One strange thing the commandline and DB Browser are using ?3.8.10.2
>> while Java is using 3.8.11.
>>
>
> Your command-line is simply outdated - you can download the newest from
> http://sqlite.org/downl
On 2016/04/16 4:09 PM, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> One strange thing the commandline and DB Browser are using ?3.8.10.2
> while Java is using 3.8.11.
Your command-line is simply outdated - you can download the newest from
http://sqlite.org/download/
DB-Browser might have a newer version also, yo
2016-04-16 16:00 GMT+02:00 R Smith :
>
>
> On 2016/04/16 3:39 PM, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
>
>> 2016-04-16 14:52 GMT+02:00 R Smith :
>>
>>-- 2016-04-16 14:44:55.054 | [Success]Script Success.
>>>
>>> As you can see, the INSERT obviously takes some time (even more-so if the
>>> CHECK constr
On 2016/04/16 3:39 PM, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> 2016-04-16 14:52 GMT+02:00 R Smith :
>
>>-- 2016-04-16 14:44:55.054 | [Success]Script Success.
>>
>> As you can see, the INSERT obviously takes some time (even more-so if the
>> CHECK constraint is added), but the DROP Table takes almost n
2016-04-16 15:44 GMT+02:00 Cecil Westerhof :
> When filling a table with 10.000 records the file is 501 KB without auto
> commit and 500 KB with auto commit. Not a big difference, but I am
> intrigued: can auto commit result in smaller SQLite files?
>
> Is with Java and SQLite 3.8.11.
>
?It is no
2016-04-16 15:41 GMT+02:00 Simon Slavin :
>
> > ?How can I get the journal mode in Jav??
> > With DB Browser I get Delete.
> > But when I in sqlite3 give:
> >PRAGMA schema.journal_mode;
> > I get:
> >Error: unknown database schema
>
> That is not well explained. Try just
>
> PRAGMA journa
When filling a table with 10.000 records the file is 501 KB without auto
commit and 500 KB with auto commit. Not a big difference, but I am
intrigued: can auto commit result in smaller SQLite files?
Is with Java and SQLite 3.8.11.
--
Cecil Westerhof
2016-04-16 14:52 GMT+02:00 R Smith :
>
>
> On 2016/04/16 11:59 AM, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
>
>> I am playing a bit with SQLite. I first had a table with 1E8 elements.
>> When
>> trying to drop this it looked like SQLite got hung. I tried it from DB
>> Browser and a Java program.
>> I just tried it
2016-04-16 14:51 GMT+02:00 Simon Slavin :
>
> On 16 Apr 2016, at 10:59am, Cecil Westerhof
> wrote:
>
> > I first had a table with 1E8 elements. When
> > trying to drop this it looked like SQLite got hung.
>
> Please tell us which version of SQLite and which journal mode you're using.
>
?I work w
On 2016/04/16 11:59 AM, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> I am playing a bit with SQLite. I first had a table with 1E8 elements. When
> trying to drop this it looked like SQLite got hung. I tried it from DB
> Browser and a Java program.
> I just tried it with a table of 1E7 elements. That was dropped in a
On 16 Apr 2016, at 2:32pm, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> ?I work with Java. With:
>SELECT SQLITE_VERSION()
> I get:
>3.8.11?
Thanks.
> ?How can I get the journal mode in Jav??
> With DB Browser I get Delete.
> But when I in sqlite3 give:
>PRAGMA schema.journal_mode;
> I get:
>Error:
On 16 Apr 2016, at 10:59am, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> I first had a table with 1E8 elements. When
> trying to drop this it looked like SQLite got hung.
Please tell us which version of SQLite and which journal mode you're using.
My guess is that the operations for 1e7 rows fit in one of the cach
I am playing a bit with SQLite. I first had a table with 1E8 elements. When
trying to drop this it looked like SQLite got hung. I tried it from DB
Browser and a Java program.
I just tried it with a table of 1E7 elements. That was dropped in about 13
seconds.
I will try it again with 1E8 elements, b
Hello !
Today I decided to see why my applications stop using index when using
my user defined "like" function and it seems that during the creation of
the "LIKE" optimization sqlite3 made some special settings to the
builtin "like" function but didn't exposed it to third party developers.
I
On 2016/04/16 3:03 AM, R Smith wrote:
> Actually, this would achieve the same, without the extra table:
No it won't work this way at all, I misjudged the outcome. That's what I
get for not testing it - Apologies!
Actually, this would achieve the same, without the extra table:
IF NO_ROWS_ARE_RETURNED_FOR (
SELECT 1 FROM (
SELECT id_r, GROUP_CONCAT(id_f) AS combo
FROM records_features
WHERE id_r = 10
GROUP BY id_r
) WHERE combo = '20,21,22'
) THEN {
INSERT INTO combo_fe
I would simply use a fourth table that is essentially itself just an
Index, say:
CREATE TABLE records_features_u (
id_r INT NOT NULL,
combo_features TEXT NOT NULL,
PRIMARY KEY (id_r, combo_features)
) WITHOUT ROWID;
IF SUCCEED(
INSERT INTO combo_features_u 10, "20,21,22";
) THEN {
I have two tables and a join table, in principle like this:
CREATE TABLE records (id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, data TEXT);
CREATE TABLE features (id INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, data TEXT UNIQUE);
CREATE TABLE records_features (id_r INTEGER, id_f INTEGER, ord INTEGER);
A record consists of one or more feature
On 2016/04/15 11:53 PM, Simon Slavin wrote:
I'm with Simon in response to Cecil on the idea of adding a shortlist of
known "bite" possibilities, something like the whentouse.html or the
howtocorrupt.html. Perhaps named commonmistakes.html or the like.
Maybe we could ask for contributions he
25 matches
Mail list logo