"Mitchell Vincent" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm converting a bunch of databases from SQLite 2.8.16 to SQLite > 3.3.13 and am seeing something pretty amazing space saving. So good > that it might be too good to be true! > > For example, a 17 meg database is cut down to 7 megs. That's fantastic > if it's just that SQlite is *that* much better at storing the data, > but I'm worried I'm missing things. The row counts for all the tables > match up but it will take more time for me to write something that > compares every field in every data table (there are more than 300 > fields total in this database). > > So is a 60%ish reduction in DB size from 2.8.16 to 3.3.13 normal? >
3.3.13 typically generates database files that are 30-40% smaller than 2.8.16. 60% seems excessive, but is not outside the range of possibility. What kind of data are you storing? Floating point numbers are 8 bytes in 3.3.13 versus 17 bytes in 2.8.16. Something like that could account for the difference. -- D. Richard Hipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
