This really depends on many things. How often are the individual tables accessed and is the access spread evenly across them ? Also, what will there be a lot more reading than writing or will it be a close ratio ? We recently used sqlite in a multi-user environment using only a single database and ran into some issues. The problem occurred because the reads and writes were conflicting and we were getting a lot of "busy" statuses. We resolved the problem by re-compiling and setting the read lock attempts to blocking instead of non-blocking. It worked fine, but obviously the more reads/writes going on, the slower things got. Looking back, I probably would have split the databases up into 1 per table because of the nature of our program. Either way will work, but having a lot of reads and writes hammering on the same database files requires higher timeout settings or blocking reads. I'd like to know which solution you choose and how it works.
-----Original Message----- From: Chris Ulliott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, June 25, 2004 8:28 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: [sqlite] Multi-User design Hi All, When using SQLite3 in a multi user environment is it better to have a single table per database file or is it better to have just one file which contains all tables in the database? I am worried about the file locking, I do not want users to have to wait for a table to become accessible just because another user is updating a different table within the database. What is the cost of performance if I put the tables into separate database files? Kind Regards, Chris --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
