Re: [sqlite] .dump-n-reload vs. vacuum - which is better?

2007-02-26 Thread Dan Kennedy
On Mon, 2007-02-26 at 17:05 -0800, Travis Daygale wrote: > I'll do that. I was troubled enough by that bug report and this new testing > info to be so motivated. :-) This would be handy for Tcl developers. In case you haven't noticed it yet, the SQL quote() function in func.c will help with

Re: [sqlite] .dump-n-reload vs. vacuum - which is better?

2007-02-26 Thread Travis Daygale
I'll do that. I was troubled enough by that bug report and this new testing info to be so motivated. :-) If I think about it, the copy method has "filename" as an argument, and a dump method for the tcl driver would need that too. All other methods I believe do not need to specify the

Re: [sqlite] .dump-n-reload vs. vacuum - which is better?

2007-02-26 Thread Gerry Snyder
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It would probably not require more than a few lines of TCL code to implement a "dump" command as a TCL proc. I know that copying from one database to another is not the same as dumping, but the following might be a useful starting point. It gets the filenames

Re: [sqlite] .dump-n-reload vs. vacuum - which is better?

2007-02-26 Thread drh
Travis Daygale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > That is useful to know (i.e. non-testing of the shell). Thanks. > > Does "the core" include the tcl driver (what I use)? (It must- the driver is > in there and the testing is done with tcl, all of this being partly why I > chose tcl for my app- but

Re: [sqlite] .dump-n-reload vs. vacuum - which is better?

2007-02-26 Thread Travis Daygale
That is useful to know (i.e. non-testing of the shell). Thanks. Does "the core" include the tcl driver (what I use)? (It must- the driver is in there and the testing is done with tcl, all of this being partly why I chose tcl for my app- but I want to make sure I'm not somehow

Re: [sqlite] .dump-n-reload vs. vacuum - which is better?

2007-02-26 Thread drh
Travis Daygale <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Tangentially, but hopefully in keeping with this thread, for the 3.3.9 > release, the change log shows: > Fixed the ".dump" command in the command-line shell to show indices, triggers > and views again. > > There was apparently a bug there. I was

RE: [sqlite] .dump-n-reload vs. vacuum - which is better?

2007-02-26 Thread James Dennett
ing it up.) -- James > -Original Message- > From: Travis Daygale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 1:05 PM > To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org > Subject: Re: [sqlite] .dump-n-reload vs. vacuum - which is better? > > Tangentially, but hopefully in

Re: [sqlite] .dump-n-reload vs. vacuum - which is better?

2007-02-26 Thread Travis Daygale
Tangentially, but hopefully in keeping with this thread, for the 3.3.9 release, the change log shows: Fixed the ".dump" command in the command-line shell to show indices, triggers and views again. There was apparently a bug there. I was unaffected but _apparently_ would have been hurt had I

Re: [sqlite] .dump-n-reload vs. vacuum - which is better?

2007-02-25 Thread mr sql
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: mr sql wrote: > I found out that doing a: > > sqlite3 my.db .dump > mydump.sql > rm my.db > sqlite3 my.db < mydump.sql > > is faster than doing a VACUUM on my.db. > > Are there any advantages of doing one over the other? My goal is to keep the > database's

Re: [sqlite] .dump-n-reload vs. vacuum - which is better?

2007-02-25 Thread drh
mr sql <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I found out that doing a: > > sqlite3 my.db .dump > mydump.sql > rm my.db > sqlite3 my.db < mydump.sql > > is faster than doing a VACUUM on my.db. > > Are there any advantages of doing one over the other? My goal is to keep the > database's structures in