On 31 Mar 2016, at 12:06am, Srikanth Bemineni
wrote:
>
> In this case a new connection is
> being given to a thread in shared cache mode to the database. If one of the
> thread gets a SQLITE_LOCKED status for statement execution, we use try
> again after some time assuming the other thread
Hi
In shared cache mode the locking seems to be per table level basis. Which
seems to not block my operations on the other tables in the same database.
When there are multiple connections, any transaction is going to create a
data base level lock, which may result in many write as well as read
Hi,
if( (lastStatus == SQLITE_OK) && mystatement)
{
m_lastStatus = sqlite3_step(mp_statement);
while( lastStatus == SQLITE_LOCKED || lastStatus == SQLITE_BUSY)
{
sleep(randomtime)
lastStatus = sqlite3_step(mp_statement);
}
}
My common
My application is a multi threaded application, which uses sqlite to store
data on a file. Our current architecture of using sqlite in shared cache
mode seems to be working absolutely fine. In this case a new connection is
being given to a thread in shared cache mode to the database. If one of the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 30/03/16 16:58, Simon Slavin wrote:
> In both modes (whether you're using 'shared cache' or not) use
> either
>
> https://www.sqlite.org/c3ref/busy_timeout.html
The last time I dealt with shared cache mode, the busy timeout did not
apply. You
5 matches
Mail list logo