Question remains if it isn't better to go to a new major version on such
changes.
Forward compatibility is assumed by users imo.
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <sqlite-users@sqlite.org>
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 1:08 PM
Subject: Re: [sqlite] v3.2.1 and current differences!
Eugene Wee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> The new file format stores boolean values (the integers 0 and 1)
> more efficiently - requiring only 1 bytes of disk space instead of
> 2. There are no other changes.
>
>
> Let me reemphasize that the new file format has caused so much
> grief that I will likely revert to the older format with 3.4.0.
> That is to say, databases created by 3.4.0 will be readable by
> 3.2.8. 3.4.0 will be able to read and write both the old and the
> new formats, of course. And you will still be able to use the new
> format using a pragma or a compile-time option. It just won't be
> the default any more.
>
> I have learned my lesson. Do not enhance the file format without
> a very good reason. Saving one byte of space when storing booleans
> is not a sufficiently good reason...
I think that reverting back is not the solution. At the moment,
the news about the change in file format is several entries down
the news and changes list. People may also not be aware that newer
SQLite versions are backwards compatible but not forwards compatible.
If the documentation was clearer on the file format, its changes
and compatibility, an enhancement of the file format may not
cause so much confusion.
You know what - the new file format supports an additional feature
that I completely forgot about: descending indices. So I suppose
it was worth going to the new format after all. I put in the
change back in December of last year and had completely forgotten
about the descending index addition. But it is coming back to
me now. I added descending indices and said to myself, as long
as I am having to change the file format, I might as well enhance
the boolean value representation too. But then I completely forgot
about the descending index change. Silly me....
P.S.: any news on when 3.4.0 will be out? :D
I still have not made a final decision on whether it will be
3.3.7 or 3.4.0. There is no incompatibility so 3.3.7 would
technically be correct. But there are a lot of enhancements
so I was thinking of going to 3.4.0 just to emphasize the
magnitude of the change.
I'm thinking end of July or early August.
