First impressions:
- the database size reduction is significant for my application 3008 KB (2.8.13) vs. 2056 KB (3.0.0)
- the footprint of the shared library is somewhat larger than claimed on the web site (240 KB) Using the same compile options for both, the 2.8.13 shared library is 226 kB while the 3.0.0 is 254 KB (gcc 3.3.1, x86, -Os -DNDEBUG=1)
- speed is improved between 5 to 10% on my most time consuming queries on a desktop system (this is reproducable) performance on the embedded target system remains to be measured
- the declaration of "sqlite3_exec_printf()" is missing in the header file, although the function is still present and works
- conversion of a sqlite 2.x application was without hassle, but it is not easy to switch forth and back between both, say, in case 3.x does have show-stoppers. (yes, #define sqlite_xy sqlite3_xy...) I am not certain that separating the APIs by name and being able to use 2.x and 3.x simultaneously provides any benefit; at least not for me. Having different sqlite_open() signatures and different library versions would have done for me. Just IMHO of course.
- I wonder how much CPU overhead the so-called "manifest typing" induces. For me, static (column-based) typing would be just fine.
- the file format provisions for variable (runtime) page sizes will likely be beneficial for my application; at least, the compile-time option for 2.x reduced the DB size by at most 3%
- is there a compile-time option to use 32 bit ROWIDs?
Frank Baumgart
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
