On 26 Feb 2020, at 5:18pm, Przemek Klosowski <przemek.klosowski+sql...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This 'store only changed values' is > intended for situations like that. > Another suitable candidate for that treatment might be a status, for > instance 'on battery' value for a UPS monitoring system. I can't think of a > scenario where storing it every time would be better. Suppose some horrible disaster happens to your chemical plant at 4pm. Your log for a particular sensor shows an acceptable value, but the timestamp on that reading is 3:15pm. But only changed readings are logged. Perhaps a fault occurred in the sampling circuit at 3:16pm, so no further readings were taken, so an alarm was not raised. Had every reading been logged you could have proved that another reading was taken at 3:58pm still showing the same acceptable value. So it depends why you're doing what you're doing. Different circumstances suggest different tactics. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
