--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> G'day,
>
>
>
>
>
> "D. Richard Hipp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> 12/06/2004 08:16 AM
>
>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> cc:
> Subject: [sqlite] Locking and
> concurrency in SQLite version 3.0
>
>
> > http://www.sqlite.org/lockingv3.html
>
> My thoughts are listed as they come to me.
>
> Thought 1:
>
> Section 5.0, entitled "Writing to a database file":
> After the in-memory cache initially spills to disk
> the exclusive lock must be maintained because the
> database file is changed. One way to avoid this....
Would you get the same effect if you had a infinitely
large pager-cache? i.e. if the cache was never spilled
until the transaction is committed.
If so, then it might be better to figure out how the
pager cache itself could use secondary storage once
it reached a configured size. This wouldn't be a file
format change.
Dan.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
