On 02/04/2011 01:04 AM, Tiberio, Sylvain wrote:
> You're right!
>
> I checked the Solaris documentation the correct flag to compile
> multithread program is -D_REENTRANT.
>
> I have reconfigured and remade sqlite libs:
>./configure --enable-threadsafe CFLAGS=-D_REENTRANT
>make
>
> I have
03, 2011 5:15 PM
To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Multithreading problem
On 02/03/2011 11:00 PM, Tiberio, Sylvain wrote:
> Here the modification in sqlite3.c:
>
> if( unlink(zPath)==(-1)&& errno!=ENOENT ){
> perror(zPath);
> ret
..@sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Dan Kennedy
> Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 4:51 PM
> To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
> Subject: Re: [sqlite] Multithreading problem
>
> On 02/03/2011 10:22 PM, Tiberio, Sylvain wrote:
>>
>> Dan,
>>
>> Thanks for your attention.
>&
al Message-
From: sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org
[mailto:sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Black, Michael
(IS)
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 4:34 PM
To: General Discussion of SQLite Database
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Multithreading problem
Can you "su" as the owner you are ar
: sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org
[mailto:sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Dan Kennedy
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 4:51 PM
To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Multithreading problem
On 02/03/2011 10:22 PM, Tiberio, Sylvain wrote:
>
> Dan,
>
> Thank
lite-users-boun...@sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Dan Kennedy
> Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 3:16 PM
> To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
> Subject: Re: [sqlite] Multithreading problem
>
> On 02/02/2011 09:31 PM, Tiberio, Sylvain wrote:
>> Hi!
>>
>>
>>
>> I have
sqlite.org [sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org] on
behalf of Tiberio, Sylvain [sylvain.tibe...@cassidian.com]
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 9:22 AM
To: General Discussion of SQLite Database
Subject: EXT :Re: [sqlite] Multithreading problem
Dan,
Thanks for your attention.
sqlite3_extended_errcod
and a null size.
Regards,
Sylvain
-Original Message-
From: sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org
[mailto:sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Dan Kennedy
Sent: Thursday, February 03, 2011 3:16 PM
To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Multithreading problem
On 02/02/2011 09:31 PM
On 02/02/2011 09:31 PM, Tiberio, Sylvain wrote:
> Hi!
>
>
>
> I have a problem when I try to create a new database in a thread and try
> to add a table on it.
>
>
>
> The following C code (see in the end of this e-mail) produces:
The program is working Ok with 3.7.5 here.
After the IO error in
Hi!
I have a problem when I try to create a new database in a thread and try
to add a table on it.
The following C code (see in the end of this e-mail) produces:
in SQLite 3.7.5: Disk I/O error (same problem with 3.7.4)
SQLite Treadsafe. Yes (1).
SQLite Lib version... 3.7.5.
Thanks Greg I will check your version :)
Pablo
-Original Message-
From: sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org [mailto:sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org]
On Behalf Of Greg Burd
Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 3:27 PM
To: General Discussion of SQLite Database
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Multithreading
I'm a tad biased...)
> -Original Message-
> From: Simon Slavin [mailto:slav...@bigfraud.org]
> Sent: Friday, July 02, 2010 1:46 PM
> To: General Discussion of SQLite Database
> Subject: Re: [sqlite] Multithreading support approach
>
>
> On 2 Jul 2010, at 6:
On 2 Jul 2010, at 6:14pm, Cargnelutti, Pablo Fernando wrote:
> Sqlite implements table level lock?
No. SQLite locks the entire database file with all tables and views in it.
Simon.
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
Hi all, I'm a beginner user of this tool. I have to questions.
What would be the better approach to multithread support for sqlite using C++
API?
I'm currently try to block, using boost mutex, locks and condition variables,
all calls to step method that attempts to modify the DB.
Sqlite
Hello,
I'm working on a C++ application under WinCE (file system is TexFAT), with
SQLite (actually version 3.6.11, but phenomenon is reproduced with 3.6.23)
with the following C++ wrapper :
http://www.alhem.net/project/sqlite/index.html . There's only one database
with three tables (file is
Shilpa Sheoran <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Does sqlite take care of pausing the other processes and resuming them
later i.e after the write completes or will they get a SQLITE_BUSY
error which they have to handle?
By default, a blocked connection will get SQLITE_BUSY right away. You
can
All,
According to the documentation..
"When any process wants to write, it must lock the entire database
file for the duration of its update. But that normally only takes a
few milliseconds. Other processes just wait on the writer to finish
then continue about their business"
Does sqlite take
> Remember, that the operating system bug that is causing all the
> multithreading grief is that file locks created by one thread
> cannot be reliably removed or modified by a different thread.
> So if a statement acquires a lock on the database file in one
> thread and you try to finalize the
Cesar, if you have an embedded application use Sqlite, it is perfect for
the job. If you want to deploy an enterprise database with concurrent
users use PostgreSQL, Mysql, Sql Server etc.
Use Sqlite as you would use a single disk file.
Cesar David Rodas Maldonado wrote:
Please i beg to
Please i beg to every one
some one can give me some link or a little of theory of how can i do for
write at same time in a database like the others databases???
please i want to do that..
Joe Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Let's assume that for a given OS that fcntl() file locks
> work perfectly well on any thread. Would it then be safe
> from an SQLite perspective to finalize statements that were
> prepared in one thread in a different thread? (where the sqlite
> connection
--- Joe Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Let's assume that for a given OS that fcntl() file locks
> work perfectly well on any thread. Would it then be safe
> from an SQLite perspective to finalize statements that were
> prepared in one thread in a different thread? (where the sqlite
>
Let's assume that for a given OS that fcntl() file locks
work perfectly well on any thread. Would it then be safe
from an SQLite perspective to finalize statements that were
prepared in one thread in a different thread? (where the sqlite
connection would only be used on one thread at a time).
hn Stanton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2006 8:14 PM
To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Multithreading. Again.
Joe Wilson wrote:
Remember, that the operating system bug that is causing all the
multithreading grief is that file locks created by one thr
Doug Nebeker wrote:
> The problem with that solution is that it assumes all database access
> happens from within a single process. As far as I understand it, SQLite
> allows database access from multiple processes (and even from remote
> processes I assume) and thus the locking has to happen
: [sqlite] Multithreading. Again.
Joe Wilson wrote:
>>Remember, that the operating system bug that is causing all the
>>multithreading grief is that file locks created by one thread cannot
>>be reliably removed or modified by a different thread.
>
>
> You
Joe Wilson wrote:
Remember, that the operating system bug that is causing all the
multithreading grief is that file locks created by one thread
cannot be reliably removed or modified by a different thread.
You could have a single thread that exclusively performs file locking/unlocking.
This
> Remember, that the operating system bug that is causing all the
> multithreading grief is that file locks created by one thread
> cannot be reliably removed or modified by a different thread.
You could have a single thread that exclusively performs file locking/unlocking.
This thread would wait
Florian Weimer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > As long as no prepared statements are outstanding, you should
> > be safe moving sqlite database connections across threads, as
> > of version 3.3.1. The rules are not really quite that strict,
> > but the exact rules are more complex and this strict
block. In c++, I do it using a stack based destructor
guard.
Pat
-Original Message-
From: Florian Weimer [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 02, 2006 9:19 AM
To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Multithreading. Again.
> As long as no prepared stateme
> As long as no prepared statements are outstanding, you should
> be safe moving sqlite database connections across threads, as
> of version 3.3.1. The rules are not really quite that strict,
> but the exact rules are more complex and this strict rule
> gives you an extra margin of safety.
Is it
"Peter Cunderlik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > 1. As of SQLite 3.3.5, there is no multithreading (MT) problem with
> > > the SQLite itself. All problems come from the underlying OS libraries.
> >
> > I would argue that this has always been the case. But beginning
> > in version 3.3.1, SQLite
> 1. As of SQLite 3.3.5, there is no multithreading (MT) problem with
> the SQLite itself. All problems come from the underlying OS libraries.
I would argue that this has always been the case. But beginning
in version 3.3.1, SQLite has taken additional steps to partially
work around problems in
OTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Multithreading. Again.
"Peter Cunderlik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I'd like to ask a couple of silly questions before newcomers like me
> get moderated. :-) I've browsed through the documentation and this
> mailing li
"Peter Cunderlik" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> I'd like to ask a couple of silly questions before newcomers like me
> get moderated. :-) I've browsed through the documentation and this
> mailing list, trying to understand issues with multithreading. I'd
> like if someone
Hello everybody,
I'd like to ask a couple of silly questions before newcomers like me
get moderated. :-) I've browsed through the documentation and this
mailing list, trying to understand issues with multithreading. I'd
like if someone could confirm my conclusions.
1. As of SQLite 3.3.5, there
Hi,
I am using Sqlite with Java and driver I am using is
javsqlite(http://www.ch-werner.de/javasqlite/). I want to have multiple
threads reading data simultaneously from SQLite (as Sqlite claims to be
Threadsafe) it seems to be possible. But going through java driver code,
all methods which talk
Am 21.10.2005 um 11:58 schrieb Michael J. Sviridov:
Using sqlite 3.2.7 in a multi-threaded C++ application:
I've got two thread's (with unique db handles), each thread does the
following:
BEGIN EXCLUSIVE TRANSACTION;
(60,000 INSERT OR REPLACE statements into the same table)
COMMIT
I have read that SQLite doesn't suport well multithreading...
I have the following problem and wonder if anyone could provide me some
guidance.
I have a GUI application using SQLite to store its data.
I have a 'Search' panel. Performing a search (scan of the database) in the
background.
And
Hi All
Using sqlite 3.2.7 in a multi-threaded C++ application:
I've got two thread's (with unique db handles), each thread does the
following:
BEGIN EXCLUSIVE TRANSACTION;
(60,000 INSERT OR REPLACE statements into the same table)
COMMIT TRANSACTION;
This works fine, as
Yep, that's how I do it. Works fine.
On 6/10/05, Brown, Dave <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I read the docs on thread safety, where it says:
>
> "Threadsafe" in the previous paragraph means that two or more threads can
> run SQLite at the same time on different "sqlite" structures returned
I read the docs on thread safety, where it says:
"Threadsafe" in the previous paragraph means that two or more threads can
run SQLite at the same time on different "sqlite" structures returned from
separate calls to sqlite_open(). It is never safe to use the same sqlite
structure pointer
On Feb 7, 2005, at 10:21 AM, Alex Chudnovsky wrote:
Correct me if I am wrong but I was under the impression that having 2
separate
connections to database (and while on subject I noticed that making
connection
via ADO.NET takes significant time measured in seconds rather than in
milliseconds)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 7, 2005, at 9:50 AM, Yogesh Marwaha wrote:
Both threads are using same sqlite connection.
This is your problem.
Each thread should use an isolated connection.
Correct me if I am wrong but I was under the impression that having 2
separate
connections to database
Hi!
Problem: 1
-
I need some help using sqlite3 with multithreading.
Here is an overview of present situation: -
I am using sqlite 3.0.8
I have two threads (A & B) working at the same time.
Thread A is used to query database while thread B is
being used for writing to the database.
Well, currently SQLite seems to meet my performance needs. Currently I
don't think that brewing my own file format would pay off. I will
consider this only as a last solution.
I was being somewhat facetious mainly to prove that you don't
actually want best possible performance. You are far
Hello Roger,
thanks for your answer.
Answers inline.
Roger Binns wrote:
itself. However, I'm afraid that this will not lead to the best
possible performance.
If you want the best possible performance then don't use SQLite at all
and instead make your own file format that exactly meets your
itself. However, I'm afraid that this will not lead to the best possible
performance.
If you want the best possible performance then don't use SQLite at all
and instead make your own file format that exactly meets your needs
and tradeoffs (memory, byte ordering, CPU, concurrency etc).
result to
Hello All,
I'm sure this questions has already been asked thousands of times, but
after searching the archive I still don't know the definite answer.
Is it safe to access the same instance of an sqlite3 database (the same
pointer returned by sqlite3_open) in several threads, provided that the
After reading that SQLite should Just Work, I dug through my code and
found my bug: I was calling sqlite_reset before invoking my precompiled
queries instead of afterwards. I changed it around and it seems to be
fixed--leaving the vm in a running state must have held a lock
somewhere?
Many
On Fri, 27 Feb 2004, D. Richard Hipp wrote:
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > I'm trying to access the database from two threads: the UI thread mostly
> > reads and occasionally updates rows, while the network thread loads new
> > messages and inserts them. Will that work, or do I just
rumcais wrote:
> I've make some experiments around accessing the SQLite database fom concurent
> processes at the same time and I find it work good when I'm using
> transactions every time I touch the database. When I don't, it corrupt the
> database file sometimes.
>
The only ways to corrupt an
- Forwarded by Ben Carlyle/AU/IRSA/Rail on 27/02/2004 09:53 AM -
Ben Carlyle
27/02/2004 09:49 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]@CORP
cc:
Subject:Re: [sqlite] multithreading
Dave,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
26/02/2004 04:56 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED
"rumcais" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
26/02/2004 05:16 PM
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
cc:
Subject: RE: [sqlite] multithreading
> I've make some experiments around accessing the SQLite database fom
concurent processe
[EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, February 26, 2004 7:56 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: [sqlite] multithreading
>
>
> I've been playing around with using SQLite for a data store in a
> newsreader app for a few days now, and I keep getting the da
I've been playing around with using SQLite for a data store in a
newsreader app for a few days now, and I keep getting the database
stuck in a locked state. The only thing that seems to fix it is
deleting the file and starting over. I tried recompiling with
-DTHREADSAFE=1, but it didn't seem
56 matches
Mail list logo
