On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
By making use of memory-mapped I/O, the current trunk of SQLite (which will
eventually become version 3.7.17 after much more refinement and testing)
can be as much as twice as fast, on some platforms and under some
workloads.
Hi Max,
The link is dead. I'd like to know more about this so can you provide
us with a live link?
Thanks.
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
don't know what's wrong with the link, I'm clicking the one from gmail
thread and it works. Other way is to google [Unresponsive system under some
file-mapping related conditions] and the first result is the thread link
Max
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 2:25 PM, Jean-Christophe Deschamps
If I issue a select statement with a ORDER BY clause and a LIMIT clause,
does SQLite do a full sort (assuming no index) and then return the first X
rows, or just a partial sort to get the first X sorted results?
--
˙uʍop-ǝpısdn sı ɹoʇıuoɯ ɹnoʎ 'sıɥʇ pɐǝɹ uɐɔ noʎ ɟı
On 7 Apr 2013, at 2:08pm, Baruch Burstein bmburst...@gmail.com wrote:
If I issue a select statement with a ORDER BY clause and a LIMIT clause,
does SQLite do a full sort (assuming no index) and then return the first X
rows, or just a partial sort to get the first X sorted results?
The ORDER
The link is dead. I'd like to know more about this so can you provide us
with a live link?
The problem is the closing parenthesis has become part of the link in Max's
first email - remove it in your browser URL window and the link works fine.
Or -
I don't know if it'd be an interesting optimization. Who's to say what the
order ends up as prior to the sort? Take for example if I have a list of
dollars and cents being returned from a query. I want the 5 top highest
cost items out of 6 possibilities, if I keep the top 5 unsorted, item 6
On 7 Apr 2013, at 3:51pm, Stephen Chrzanowski pontia...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't know if it'd be an interesting optimization. Who's to say what the
order ends up as prior to the sort? Take for example if I have a list of
dollars and cents being returned from a query. I want the 5 top
Dear all,
when compiling the latest 3.7.16.1 version of SQLite, the VS compiler complains
about some 64 bit portability issues, see below. May these warning be safely
ignored when compiling 64 bit? All warnings refer to the sqlite3.c amalgamation
file. Thanks in advance.
Line 6766
Stephen Chrzanowski wrote:
I don't know if it'd be an interesting optimization. Who's to say what the
order ends up as prior to the sort?
When doing a merge sort, it would actually be possible to abort the very
last merge step when the first LIMIT entries have been merged.
I might be wrong,
I think that in general it might be a good idea to update the code to
not produce any 64 bit portability warnings, so that we know for sure,
that compiling 64 bit does not introduce any 64 bit side effects or possible
bugs.
...as long as doing so does not break 32-bit code...
Fred
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Baruch Burstein bmburst...@gmail.comwrote:
If I issue a select statement with a ORDER BY clause and a LIMIT clause,
does SQLite do a full sort (assuming no index) and then return the first X
rows, or just a partial sort to get the first X sorted results?
It
Possibly related:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrashing_(computer_science)
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 6:25 AM, Jean-Christophe Deschamps
j...@antichoc.netwrote:
Hi Max,
The link is dead. I'd like to know more about this so can you provide us
with a live link?
Thanks.
On 7 Apr 2013, at 6:26pm, f...@cetussoft.com wrote:
I think that in general it might be a good idea to update the code to
not produce any 64 bit portability warnings, so that we know for sure,
that compiling 64 bit does not introduce any 64 bit side effects or possible
bugs.
...as long
On 7 Apr 2013, at 6:56pm, Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org wrote:
It uses a btree as a priority queue. If you have LIMIT N, then it
initially starts putting results into the btree until the btree contains N
entries. Then for each additional row, it first adds the value to the
btree, then
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Chris Smith smitt...@gmail.com wrote:
Possibly related:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrashing_(computer_science)
That's an interesting direction. Surprisingly if one query
... site:microsoft.com Thrashing memory-mapped...
on google, he or she would find a
I was thinking more of general (not just LIMIT 1) optimization:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial_sorting
On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Simon Slavin slav...@bigfraud.org wrote:
On 7 Apr 2013, at 3:51pm, Stephen Chrzanowski pontia...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't know if it'd be an
Do you know that VS2012 has known optimizer bugs?
Pavel
On Apr 6, 2013 5:01 AM, ibrahim ibrahim.a...@googlemail.com wrote:
On 05.04.2013 17:01, Dan Kennedy wrote:
On 04/05/2013 09:08 PM, Rob Collie wrote:
Yeap, I'm on Visual Studio 2012. I've created a console app:
sqlite3 *oDatabase;
If you have any issues with the current code, please report them via this
mailing
list (and/or by creating a ticket on https://system.data.sqlite.org/;)
prior to
this Friday, April 12th.
Thanks.
--
Joe Mistachkin
___
sqlite-users mailing list
19 matches
Mail list logo
