On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 02:39:49PM +, Black, Michael (IS) scratched on the
wall:
> I thought a backup was using a snapshot and locking the database?
No... the source DB remains available. That's largely the point of
the API. In fact, the full name is the "Online Backup API." The fact
From: sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org [sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org] on
behalf of Jay A. Kreibich [j...@kreibi.ch]
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 8:37 AM
To: General Discussion of SQLite Database
Subject: EXT :Re: [sqlite] Converting in-memory sqlite database
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 02:05:02PM +, Black, Michael (IS) scratched on the
wall:
> And if you want to improve latency you can use fifo's on Unix or
> anonymous pipes on Windows and run a thread to send your data
> while it's writing since those methods are synchronous.
I would not assume
writing to a file is indeed the easy way, but I would rather not involve
the filesystem if possible. yet, I guess that will be the way I will choose
at the end. I also had a look at VFS, but an easier method would have been
better of course.
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Eric Minbiole
Minbiole [eminbi...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2012 7:53 AM
To: General Discussion of SQLite Database
Subject: EXT :Re: [sqlite] Converting in-memory sqlite database to char array
As a first (simple) approach, I might use the standard backup API to back
up to a temp file, then stream
As a first (simple) approach, I might use the standard backup API to back
up to a temp file, then stream that file byte by byte over the
communication protocol.
I'm sure there may be other more direct-to-memory approaches, perhaps using
a custom VFS. However, this approach should be simple and
6 matches
Mail list logo
