> -Original Message-
> From: sqlite-users
> [mailto:sqlite-users-boun...@mailinglists.sqlite.org] On
> Behalf Of Hick Gunter
>
> In our virtual table implementations, we are using the rowid
> to return the location of the record in the backing store
> (e.g. record offset in the file us
> Behalf Of Dan Kennedy
> Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 11:58 AM
>
> On 10/17/2017 01:22 PM, Hick Gunter wrote:
> > In our virtual table implementations, we are using the
> rowid to return the location of the record in the backing
> store (e.g. record offset in the file used as a backing
> st
Pre-release packages of System.Data.SQLite version 1.0.106.0 are now
available on the System.Data.SQLite website:
https://system.data.sqlite.org/
Please click on the "Pre-Release Download" link in order to view the
available pre-release packages.
Further information about this upcoming rel
On 10/17/2017 01:22 PM, Hick Gunter wrote:
In our virtual table implementations, we are using the rowid to return the
location of the record in the backing store (e.g. record offset in the file
used as a backing store, offset within a shared memory section or maybe even
the memory address of t
> On 10/16/17, dave wrote:
> > Hi, I am building a system which involves a number of virtual table
> > implementations. They are all read-only, but will be
> involved in a bunch of
> > joins amongst themselves. My question is this:
> >
> > the documentation
> > http://sqlite.org/vtab.html#tab
If you're doing 1 gigantic insert to populate the table then it's more
efficient to delay creating an index until the end. If you've already got a
bunch of data in there and are inserting more, then you get diminishing returns
from that. In this case though you're not creating a separate good in
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 3:16 PM, Lodewijk Duymaer van Twist <
lodew...@adesys.nl> wrote:
> Thank you for investigating. You're fix works. Should I repost this as a
> bug with your fix, or will this be picked up as is right now?
>
Glad it did. Just sit tight and again wait and see if Dr Hipp agree
Hi Dominique,
Thank you for investigating. You're fix works. Should I repost this as a bug
with your fix, or will this be picked up as is right now?
Kind regard,
Lodewijk
Van: "Dominique Devienne"
Aan: "sqlite-users"
Verzonden: Dinsdag 17 oktober 2017 13:38:13
Onderwerp: Re: [sqlite]
On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Lodewijk Duymaer van Twist <
lodew...@adesys.nl> wrote:
> That would be an other way, but what I'm looking for is using the Command
> Line Shell ".testcase" and ".check" method.
>
OK. That's new information :)
> Create an example test file:
> echo ".testcase 10
On 10/16/17, dave wrote:
> Hi, I am building a system which involves a number of virtual table
> implementations. They are all read-only, but will be involved in a bunch of
> joins amongst themselves. My question is this:
>
> the documentation
> http://sqlite.org/vtab.html#tabfunc2 at 2.12 xRo
Hi Dominique,
That would be an other way, but what I'm looking for is using the Command Line
Shell ".testcase" and ".check" method.
Create an example test file:
echo ".testcase 100
SELECT (1,2,3)<(1,2,4), (1,2,3)<(1,NULL,4), (1,2,3)<(2,NULL,1);
.check 1||1
.testcase 110
SELECT (1,2,3)<(1
In order to profile sqlite 3.9.2 and sqlite 3.16.2, I run speedtest1.c on my
mobile phone.
It is weird to find that 3.9.2 is better than 3.16.2, especially in the
following case:
“270, 1 DELETEs, numeric BETWEEN, indexed"
3.9.2 uses 0.7s while 3.16.2 uses 1.8s;
My relevant comp
Yes, I understand that beyond integer, float, and chars, there are no
further "types", but I was just questioning whether current_timestamp
formats what it stores in a specific manor, or, if it has some dealings
with the locale of the system its executed on. You've answered the
question. Thanks.
13 matches
Mail list logo