Re: [sqlite] WAL on a separate filesystem?

2011-01-19 Thread Russell Leighton
On Jan 19, 2011, at 5:35 AM, Richard Hipp wrote: > On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 2:52 AM, Dustin Sallings > wrote: > >> >> Is it possible without violating any assumptions that would >> lead to >> reliability problems to have a DB's WAL exist on a separate >> filesystem?

Re: [sqlite] Using sqlite's WAL with a hash table store

2010-11-04 Thread Russell Leighton
Check out: http://jaksprats.wordpress.com/2010/09/28/introducing-redisql-the-lightning-fast-polyglot/ On Nov 3, 2010, at 10:51 AM, Jay A. Kreibich wrote: > On Wed, Nov 03, 2010 at 05:10:22PM +0300, Alexey Pechnikov scratched > on the wall: >> 2010/11/3 Jay A. Kreibich

Re: [sqlite] Creating Histogram fast and efficiently :)

2008-12-31 Thread Russell Leighton
create table numbers (val integer); insert into numbers values (1); insert into numbers values (5); sqlite> select * from numbers order by val; 1 5 10 12 12 15 20 20 20 select case when val < 10 then 1 when val >=10 and val < 20 then 2 else 3 end as bin, count(1) as c

[sqlite] Patch to allow custom meta commands?

2008-10-04 Thread Russell Leighton
Richard, Would you accept a patch to allow user supplied 'dot' commands in the shell? For my own purposes I wanted to have '.load' define some meta commands as well as custom SQL functions. Would anyone else find this useful? Russ ___

Re: [sqlite] Specifing which index to use. Was: Performance/bug in multikey 'group by' in 3.6.2

2008-09-26 Thread Russell Leighton
as partitions (like above for the web site) is a great way to scale. The application will know if a table scan is better or not. Sqlite itself does not have the view. On Sep 26, 2008, at 1:23 PM, Nicolas Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, Sep 26, 2008 at 12:54:36PM -0400

Re: [sqlite] Specifing which index to use. Was: Performance/bug in multikey 'group by' in 3.6.2

2008-09-26 Thread Russell Leighton
Perfect solution as long as there is a no index option along with index by. On Sep 26, 2008, at 12:54 PM, Russell Leighton <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > I have another scenario where this is needed , the one in the subject. > I repeated this problem this AM. > > I

Re: [sqlite] Specifing which index to use. Was: Performance/bug in multikey 'group by' in 3.6.2

2008-09-26 Thread Russell Leighton
I have another scenario where this is needed , the one in the subject. I repeated this problem this AM. I need a 2 key index for some queries and also want to aggregate on these 2 columns. I need this index BUT I have many large sqlite dbs I iterate over and they won't fit in the filesystem

Re: [sqlite] Performance/bug in multikey 'group by' in 3.6.2

2008-09-21 Thread Russell Leighton
A reason I think such functionality would be ideal for sqlite is that it avoids the need for a fancy query plan optimizer. The user would have a way to direct the query plan if the simple and obvious plan is suboptimal. On Sep 21, 2008, at 11:36 AM, "D. Richard Hipp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Re: [sqlite] Performance/bug in multikey 'group by' in 3.6.2

2008-09-21 Thread Russell Leighton
Oracle has 'hints' which live in the comments emdedded in the select. Google 'oracle hint use index'. The 3rd hit down my result list has a nice overview.(I'd send the link but this stupid iPhone has no cut-n- paste). I think that hints are really ugly. Not sure about the other big dmbs.

[sqlite] Disabling index [was Re: Performance/bug in multikey 'group by' in 3.6.2

2008-09-20 Thread Russell Leighton
Alternatively: pragma planner_ignore_index=1 On Sep 20, 2008, at 11:37 AM, Russell Leighton <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote: > It would be very nice to have a way to explicitly control index use. > > I'm going to test my theory this weekend but I think if the index

Re: [sqlite] Performance/bug in multikey 'group by' in 3.6.2

2008-09-20 Thread Russell Leighton
It would be very nice to have a way to explicitly control index use. I'm going to test my theory this weekend but I think if the index is not cached and the data large then the group by is faster without the index. If this is the case I have a real issue. I need the index for other queries

Re: [sqlite] SQLite version 3.6.2

2008-09-01 Thread Russell Leighton
Are there expected performance differences (better or worse) as a result of the code factoring? On Aug 30, 2008, at 8:01 PM, D. Richard Hipp wrote: > SQLite version 3.6.2 is now available on the SQLite website: > http://www.sqlite.org/download.html > > SQLite version 3.6.2 contains rewrites

Re: [sqlite] How to emulate generate_series function?

2008-07-23 Thread Russell Leighton
I think you are asking about 'table functions', which are functions that return a rowset and are used in place of a table to generate rows. See: http://www.postgresql.org/docs/7.3/static/xfunc-tablefunctions.html To my knowledge this is not supported in sqlite, except perhaps via virtual

Re: [sqlite] patch to allow integer rtree keys

2008-07-12 Thread Russell Leighton
On Jul 12, 2008, at 11:08 AM, Dan wrote: > > On Jul 12, 2008, at 2:42 AM, Steve Friedman wrote: > >> >> >> Filip Navara wrote: >>> how about actually attaching the patch? :) >>> >>> - Filip >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 9:23 PM, Steve Friedman >>> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I've just

Re: [sqlite] Writing double into a socket file

2008-06-09 Thread Russell Leighton
On Jun 9, 2008, at 8:52 PM, Igor Tandetnik wrote: > "Alex Katebi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote in message > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> I am trying to implement remote procedure calls (RPC) for SQLite API >> to be used in my application. >> In particular sqlite3_column_double( ) returns a floating

[sqlite] Firefox 3 and the SQLite "bug"

2008-05-22 Thread Russell Leighton
Digg has an article where it is said that the new Firefox "locks" up under Linux due to SQLite: http://digg.com/linux_unix/ Firefox_3_has_system_killing_performance_problem_for_Linux Bug here: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=421482 Scanning the bug it seems to

Re: [sqlite] Memory Usage

2007-11-18 Thread Russell Leighton
On Nov 17, 2007, at 4:56 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you compile with -DSQLITE_MEMORY_SIZE= then SQLite will *never* call malloc(). Instead, it uses a static array that is bytes in size for all of its memory needs. You can get by with as little as 100K or so of memory, though

Re: [sqlite] Proposed sqlite3_initialize() interface

2007-10-30 Thread Russell Leighton
On Oct 30, 2007, at 10:18 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: To accomodate this need, we are considering an incompatible API change to SQLite. We are thinking of requiring that an application invoke: int sqlite3_initialize(...); I am not sure about the systems that you are trying to

Re: [sqlite] FTS2 suggestion

2007-08-23 Thread Russell Leighton
Could fts3 (the next fts) have the option to override the default 'match' function with one passed in (similar to the tokenizer)? The reason I ask is then the fts table could be used as smart index when the tokenizer is something like bigram, trigram, etc. and the 'match' function computes

Re: [sqlite] Tomcat crashes with SQLite

2007-06-22 Thread Russell Leighton
If you did not compile sqlite as multi-threaded this is exactly what would happen. On Jun 22, 2007, at 9:06 PM, Frederic de la Goublaye wrote: Hi I just tried this driver: http://www.zentus.com/sqlitejdbc/ The result is ten times slower or even more. Maybe I am wrong using this new

[sqlite] FTS2 Experiences?

2007-06-18 Thread Russell Leighton
Could folks that have used fts2 in production apps/systems relate their experiences to the group? I would very much be interested in how folks are using it, how well it performs with large data and general impressions. Thanks in advance. Russ

[sqlite] Index in seperate db file, low impact change?

2006-06-15 Thread Russell Leighton
Given you can attach multiple database files in sqlite, perhaps it could be extended such that: * When you name an index, you optionally prepend the database name which can be in another currently attached db * You attached to multiple db files that have cross references as:

Re: [sqlite] BEGIN and Backup [was [sqlite] Problems with multiple threads?]

2006-06-07 Thread Russell Leighton
Thx! [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Russell Leighton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So, this was very enlightening...I have a simple backup function that I now question is correct. It does: - execute "begin" // lock from writes -copy db file to new file byte by byte -

[sqlite] BEGIN and Backup [was Re: [sqlite] Problems with multiple threads?]

2006-06-07 Thread Russell Leighton
So, this was very enlightening...I have a simple backup function that I now question is correct. It does: - execute "begin" // lock from writes -copy db file to new file byte by byte - execute "commit" // unlock ...I was thinking that "begin" would lock the file. If I use an flock()

Re: [sqlite] Sqlite inside MySQL as one of the pluggable "storage mechanisms" ?

2006-04-22 Thread Russell Leighton
I was afraid of that...it would be cool if someone created a sqlite server which handled the networking and serialization...I would take a crack at it myself but right now I don't have time. Dan Kennedy wrote: I had a musing while reading:

[sqlite] Sqlite inside MySQL as one of the pluggable "storage mechanisms" ?

2006-04-21 Thread Russell Leighton
I had a musing while reading: http://news.com.com/2100-7344_3-6063599.html?part=rss=6063599=news where it reminded me of one of MySQL's features: MySQL's database is built so that it can use a range of different storage mechanisms, tuned for different purposes, such as

Re: [sqlite] C Code in a trigger supported in 3.3.x?

2006-01-25 Thread Russell Leighton
Solved. Bug in my code. Sorry for the alarm. Russell Leighton wrote: Update. I actually have 2 nearly identical triggers as described below. One works, the other produces "shifted" output...it appears that the sqlite3_column_xxx() functions are returning the wrong data when

Re: [sqlite] C Code in a trigger supported in 3.3.x?

2006-01-24 Thread Russell Leighton
produces proper data. Digging into it further... Russell Leighton wrote: This worked in 3.2.8 but not in 3.3.1/2 I delcare a function using sqlite3_create_function()...this takes 1 arg , an integer and calls the usual code to execute a 'select[ based on the integer as a key and does

[sqlite] C Code in a trigger supported in 3.3.x?

2006-01-24 Thread Russell Leighton
This worked in 3.2.8 but not in 3.3.1/2 I delcare a function using sqlite3_create_function()...this takes 1 arg , an integer and calls the usual code to execute a 'select[ based on the integer as a key and does some work based on the result. I declare a temp trigger to call the above

Re: [sqlite] Same error is flagged in 3.2.8 for sqlite3GenerateConstraintChecks() [was [sqlite] Known issue in 3.2.7 in vaccum?

2006-01-23 Thread Russell Leighton
Thx. I'll re-test with 3.3.1. That said, isn't 3.2.8 supposed to be the stable release? [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Russell Leighton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Recompiled using 3.2.8 of sqlite, same issue is flagged by valgrind. 3.2.8 is a single-line change to

[sqlite] 3.2.8 'make test' fails tests under linux

2006-01-23 Thread Russell Leighton
' under: FedoraCore4 , gcc4.1 Gentoo 2.6.14-gentoo-r5, gcc 3.3.5 On gentoo I also get these date failures (which I don't see under FedoraCore4): date-6.1 date-6.4 date-6.5 date-6.8 date-6.13 date-6.16 Russell Leighton wrote: Recompiled using 3.2.8 of sqlite, same issue is flagged

[sqlite] Same error is flagged in 3.2.8 for sqlite3GenerateConstraintChecks() [was Re: [sqlite] Known issue in 3.2.7 in vaccum?

2006-01-23 Thread Russell Leighton
Recompiled using 3.2.8 of sqlite, same issue is flagged by valgrind. Russell Leighton wrote: Also, this happens under any constrained insert...from the stack trace below you would that that would be true. This is confirmed during another test scenario doing an insert statement

[sqlite] Known issue in 3.2.7 in vaccum?

2006-01-23 Thread Russell Leighton
During valgrind ( www.valgrind.org ) testing under linux I was executing "vaccum" and got: ==17449== Conditional jump or move depends on uninitialised value(s) ==17449==at 0x1CF2200C: sqlite3GenerateConstraintChecks (insert.c:980) ==17449==by 0x1CF233F6: sqlite3Insert (insert.c:629)