I’m very interested in the answer to this as I was planning on do the exact same thing. Not sure my app would even be able to function without WAL mode.
Brian Macy On Jan 14, 2019, 8:28 AM -0500, Dominique Devienne <ddevie...@gmail.com>, wrote: > On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 2:23 PM Wout Mertens <wout.mert...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > AFAIK, your best bet is to put a file db on a ramdisk (tmpfs). > > > That's not a very portable solution, and a work-around at best. > > I don't see anything technical that would prevent WAL to work for > ":memory:". > "Shared-memory" "in-process" is just memory about all... > And mutexes already exists in SQLite to protected access when necessary. > > In-memory DBs are just so useful, and WAL is just so useful, > I just don't see why we can't have both at the same time. > Richard? > > > > The ":memory:" DB is per connection only. > > > > Not really. You can open the same :memory: DB > from different connections in the same process, via URIs. --DD > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org > http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
