The real frustration is that this seems to be a rather obvious bug in Vista,
and definitely not SQLite's responsibility.  IMO setting the flag is the
"right thing to do" -- but at the same time, I don't expect any favors from
Microsoft in fixing this any time soon.  Meanwhile all those poor Vista
people need SQLite to work well with their OS.

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Roger Binns
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 1:18 AM
To: General Discussion of SQLite Database
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Vista frustrations

Hash: SHA1

Robert Simpson wrote:
> To me this seems like an obvious bug in Vista,

Actually I'd argue that it is behaving as designed.  Generally
filesystem code will try to detect what is going on under the hood.  In
particular if it looks like you are doing sequential access(*) then they
will start doing read ahead, whereas read ahead is a waste for random
access.  By using the sequential or random flags you are explicitly
telling the filesystem to ignore its heuristics and do as you say only.

Since SQLite cannot tell in advance whether access is almost entirely
random or almost entirely sequential, it makes far more sense to let the
operating system use its builtin heuristics and optimise accordingly.

(*) Sun's ZFS can even detect strided sequential access - ie reading X
amount of data every Y kilobytes.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

sqlite-users mailing list

sqlite-users mailing list

Reply via email to