On 5/14/18, 9:17 AM, "sqlite-users on behalf of Bernard Ertl" 
<sqlite-users-boun...@mailinglists.sqlite.org on behalf of 
bern...@interplansystems.com> wrote:

    Apologies if I muddled the waters here.  I read the "SQLightning" response 
below as SQLitening.  I didn't know there was a similarly named project out 
there.  I also can't see the beginning of this discussion to have context on 
what was originally asked, so I don't know which project was actually intended.

Ah, OK. Here's more context, don't know if it'll help: 

Clemens Ladisch wrote:
> Techno Magos wrote:
>> So, memory sqlite is not really usable with multiple threads (readers).
>> While one might expect  that multiple readers of *memory *content could
>> scale even better than with file content.
> Concurrent accesses to the same in-memory data structures must be
> serialized.  In shared-cache mode, the connections share the cache, while
> on-disk connections each have their own cache.
>> Is there some special mode possible to achieve scaling up throughput with
>> multiple threads for memory sqlite content?
> Put a DB file on a RAM disk.  Or on a normal disk (with looser synchronous
> and journal_mode settings), and rely on the OS file cache.

Or just use SQLightning, which has no scalability limits for readers.

sqlite-users mailing list

Reply via email to