Teg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello drh,
>
> You tested under Windows with synchronous=OFF? I mean specifically
> that way. I've never seen Sqlite trash a DB when I had synchronous
> turned on even with app crashes.
>
An application crash should not corrupt the DB even with
synchronous=OFF.
see below for a counter perspective
On 2/22/07, John Stanton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Thomas Fjellstrom wrote:
> On February 21, 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>"Brett Keating" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>I'm curious about what the effect of having a blob in the database may
Hello drh,
You tested under Windows with synchronous=OFF? I mean specifically
that way. I've never seen Sqlite trash a DB when I had synchronous
turned on even with app crashes.
C
Thursday, February 22, 2007, 9:56:57 AM, you wrote:
dhc> Teg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I'm pretty sure an
Thomas Fjellstrom wrote:
On February 21, 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
"Brett Keating" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I'm curious about what the effect of having a blob in the database may
be on performance. I have two design options: 1) put a small image file
(15-30kbyte) into the database
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dennis Jenkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
these are the settings that our app uses when it creates/opens the sqlite
database:
db.ExecuteImmediate("PRAGMA synchronous=OFF");
With synchronous=OFF, a power failure might result in database
corruption. Is thi
Teg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm pretty sure an application crash even without power failure can
> corrupt to. At least in my experience. I keep synchronous on and
> simply use "insert or ignore" syntax within a transaction to get
> performance.
>
It is not suppose to. There are extensive
Hello drh,
Thursday, February 22, 2007, 9:08:08 AM, you wrote:
dhc> Dennis Jenkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> these are the settings that our app uses when it creates/opens the sqlite
>> database:
>>
>> db.ExecuteImmediate("PRAGMA synchronous=OFF");
dhc> With synchronous=OFF, a powe
Hello Dan,
On Thu, February 22, 2007 06:08, Dan Kennedy wrote:
> * Can include blob operations as part of atomic transactions.
me too. Transactions are a major advantage of database blobs.
Bye,
--
Denis Sbragion
InfoTecna
Tel: +39 0362 805396, Fax: +39 0362 805404
Dennis Jenkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> these are the settings that our app uses when it creates/opens the sqlite
> database:
>
> db.ExecuteImmediate("PRAGMA synchronous=OFF");
With synchronous=OFF, a power failure might result in database
corruption. Is this an issue for you?
--
D.
Thomas Fjellstrom wrote:
I still wonder about the utility of storing binary data in the db itself.
Maybe it makes it more easy to distribute that way, but how often does one
distribute an entire database in a "vendor specific" format?
I'm quite interested in hearing people's reasoning for goin
Hello drh,
Thursday, February 22, 2007, 7:54:58 AM, you wrote:
dhc> A common use for SQLite is as an application file format. When
you do File->>Open, instead of reading and parsing a bunch of
dhc> information in a proprietary format, just call sqlite3_open()
dhc> on the file instead. File->Sa
Thomas Fjellstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I still wonder about the utility of storing binary data in the db itself.
> Maybe it makes it more easy to distribute that way, but how often does one
> distribute an entire database in a "vendor specific" format?
A common use for SQLite is as an
Ion Silvestru <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >* In SQLite, my blobs won't be corrupted if the machine loses power
> > the way they (probably) will be if I write my own code to access
> > the file-system.
>
> But, in case of a corruption, you will have entire blob DB corrupted versus
> at least one
>* In SQLite, my blobs won't be corrupted if the machine loses power
> the way they (probably) will be if I write my own code to access
> the file-system.
But, in case of a corruption, you will have entire blob DB corrupted versus
at least one file (aka one row in DB) corrupted.
-
>>I'm fairly sure disk space requirements will be nearly identical in
>>each case...
In case of blobs in SQLite there will be less disk space used than in
case of file system (cluster size etc.)
-
To unsubscribe, send e
> I'm quite interested in hearing people's reasoning for going the blob route,
> when you have a perfectly good "database" format for "blobs" already (various
> filesystems).
Three technical reasons for me personally:
* Can include blob operations as part of atomic transactions.
* In SQLite
On February 21, 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> "Brett Keating" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm curious about what the effect of having a blob in the database may
> > be on performance. I have two design options: 1) put a small image file
> > (15-30kbyte) into the database as a blob
Thanks I think this answers my question well!
Brett
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 1:41 PM
To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Effect of blobs on performance
"Brett Keating" <[EM
t query/update performance.
Thanks,
Brett
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of P
Kishor
Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 1:38 PM
To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Effect of blobs on performance
On 2/21/07, Brett Keating <[
My suggestion: Do a quick experiment. I had a similar question a year
or so ago. I wrote some code a year or so that generated random blobs
of varying sizes and tossed them into a SQLite DB and onto files on
the file system (Mac OS).
There are some complicating variables, such as our applic
"Brett Keating" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm curious about what the effect of having a blob in the database may
> be on performance. I have two design options: 1) put a small image file
> (15-30kbyte) into the database as a blob, and 2) store the image in a
> separate file on disk and
On 2/21/07, Brett Keating <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
I'm curious about what the effect of having a blob in the database may
be on performance. I have two design options: 1) put a small image file
(15-30kbyte) into the database as a blob, and 2) store the image in a
separate file on disk and
Hi,
I'm curious about what the effect of having a blob in the database may
be on performance. I have two design options: 1) put a small image file
(15-30kbyte) into the database as a blob, and 2) store the image in a
separate file on disk and hold the filename in the database. My table
has around
23 matches
Mail list logo
