I think this will work:
INSERT INTO queries VALUES ('Alex');
INSERT INTO queries VALUES ('Rob');
select * from names
where exists (
select query from queries
where names.name like '%'||query||'%'
);
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 at 15:19, David Raymond
wrote:
> Or alternatively something like:
On 23/11/62 17:02, Mario M. Westphal wrote:
I have an issue with concurrency. This may be the intended behavior of
SQLite. Or I'm doing something wrong.
If somebody could shed a light, I would be thankful.
I compile and use SQLite on Windows with VStudio.
I compile it with
All,
Could someone clarify the difference between the two sqlite3 shell commands
.header and .headers?
The relevant documentation page: https://www.sqlite.org/cli.html
On this page, .header is discussed in section 5 but does not appear in Section
3.
Thanks,
Craig
--
Craig H Maynard
Rhode
On 11/23/19, Craig H Maynard wrote:
> All,
>
> Could someone clarify the difference between the two sqlite3 shell commands
> .header and .headers?
>
> The relevant documentation page: https://www.sqlite.org/cli.html
>
> On this page, .header is discussed in section 5 but does not appear in
>
I have an issue with concurrency. This may be the intended behavior of
SQLite. Or I'm doing something wrong.
If somebody could shed a light, I would be thankful.
I compile and use SQLite on Windows with VStudio.
I compile it with SQLITE_THREADSAFE=1
At runtime, I use sqlite3_open_v2 () and
Both queries will work like this:
DROP TABLE names;
CREATE TABLE names (name TEXT);
INSERT INTO names VALUES ('Alex');
INSERT INTO names VALUES ('Alexander');
INSERT INTO names VALUES ('Alexandra');
INSERT INTO names VALUES ('Rob');
INSERT INTO names VALUES ('Rhobin'); -- should not match
INSERT
Some follow up and thank you all for looking at this.
Using this mornings trunk/current/head I do see the tests running well
with these little exceptions :
boe13$ pwd
/opt/bw/build/sqlite_20191121213415_rhel_74_3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64.006
... build clean as usual :-)
tests run nicely now
I may be the only person that does this sort of testing for my own
reasons and perhaps for sanity checking also. I tend to think that if
something is written to be compliant with C89/C90 then I should be able
to run the most strict compliance compiler flags in creation and be
perfectly happy.
On 23 Nov 2019, at 11:06pm, Richard Hipp wrote:
> given the choice between
>
> (1) Code that works and does something useful
> (2) Code that is standards compliant
>
> I'll always go with (1).
Another problem is that different compilers, or the same compiler with
different options, warn
On 11/23/19 4:46 PM, Dan Kennedy wrote:
Some follow up and thank you all for looking at this.
Using this mornings trunk/current/head I do see the tests running well
with these little exceptions :
boe13$ pwd
/opt/bw/build/sqlite_20191121213415_rhel_74_3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64.006
... build
That's very helpful, thank you very much, Daniel. Also to Jens.
I've re-read the SQLite documentation for shared cache now. I guess I had
enabled it in the past to increase the performance (many threads in my
application).
Apparently, this had the opposite effect :-/
After disabling the
Strictly compliant code strictly doesn't need to do anything at all,
conforming to strict standards instead of what compilers actually do is an
interesting intellectual exercise but is not necessarily useful.
On Sat, Nov 23, 2019, 16:27 Dennis Clarke wrote:
>
> I may be the only person that
Op za 23 nov. 2019 om 23:27 schreef Dennis Clarke:
> /usr/local/build/sqlite-src-3300100_Oracle_sparc64vii+.005/src/tclsqlite.c:
> "/usr/local/build/sqlite-src-3300100_Oracle_sparc64vii+.005/src/tclsqlite.c",
> line 2624: warning: argument #3 is incompatible with prototype:
> prototype:
On 11/23/19 11:06 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
conforming to strict standards instead of what compilers actually do
My problem here is that the compilers and their ability to comply with
those wonderful cross platform standards is always a moving picture.
Regardless it may be of some value to put
> On Nov 23, 2019, at 7:17 AM, Dan Kennedy wrote:
>
> This should only happen if you are using shared-cache mode. Don't use
> shared-cache mode.
Shared-cache mode also breaks Isolation between connections — during a
transaction, other connections will see the writer’s intermediate state.
On 11/23/19, Peter da Silva wrote:
> Strictly compliant code strictly doesn't need to do anything at all,
> conforming to strict standards instead of what compilers actually do is an
> interesting intellectual exercise but is not necessarily useful.
Right. So given the choice between
(1) Code
On 11/23/19 6:35 PM, Simon Slavin wrote:
> On 23 Nov 2019, at 11:06pm, Richard Hipp wrote:
>
>> given the choice between
>>
>> (1) Code that works and does something useful
>> (2) Code that is standards compliant
>>
>> I'll always go with (1).
> Another problem is that different compilers, or the
1 - I was taught C by kre back in 1982 (or was it 1983?), on a VAX
called "munnari," for those who remember their history :->
I remember you however I started on BSD implementaions in 83 or 84 with
the first real big workstations I had being the Apollo DN1000 and DN3000
boxen. Those things
On 11/23/19 11:35 PM, Simon Slavin wrote:
On 23 Nov 2019, at 11:06pm, Richard Hipp wrote:
given the choice between
(1) Code that works and does something useful
(2) Code that is standards compliant
I'll always go with (1).
Another problem is that different compilers, or the same compiler
On 24/11/2019 10:35, Simon Slavin wrote:
On 23 Nov 2019, at 11:06pm, Richard Hipp wrote:
given the choice between
(1) Code that works and does something useful
(2) Code that is standards compliant
I'll always go with (1).
Another problem is that different compilers, or the same compiler
has anyone successfully used this tool to do a reconciliation
between two tables, i am looking to do simple rec between two tables on same db
or if need be on sep db with same table name
with a key, it seems to not work very well or often gives me an error saying
that table does not exist in
21 matches
Mail list logo
