On 26/03/18 13:30, Simone Mosciatti wrote:
> However I fail to see how this can be a problem for purely in-memory
> database.
When a process forks, only the thread that called fork is kept in the
new child process. Also note that semaphores (and locks in general) are
left in the same state as at
Simone Mosciatti wrote:
> it is suggested in several place to don't share a connection between forks.
Because of how locking and file handles interact.
> However I fail to see how this can be a problem for purely in-memory database.
In-memory databases do not use a file handle or file locking.
Hi all,
it is suggested in several place to don't share a connection between forks.
However I fail to see how this can be a problem for purely in-memory
database.
If my understanding of fork and sqlite are correct I don't see issues in
having a forked child reading a database connection
3 matches
Mail list logo
