Does the "undolog" table, or whatever you're using in its place, have a primary key?
On Mar 20, 2009, at 1:20 PM, Damien Elmes wrote: > Well, those 3 x the number of tables in the Db. > > On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:17 PM, Damien Elmes <reso...@ichi2.net> > wrote: >> Yep - but only the three listed on this page: >> >> http://www.sqlite.org/cvstrac/wiki?p=UndoRedo >> >> So they shouldn't be modifying anything in the main DB, only the >> temporary DB. >> >> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 3:13 PM, Dan <danielk1...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mar 20, 2009, at 8:10 AM, Damien Elmes wrote: >>> >>>> Unfortunately, a user has just reported the same primary key error >>>> message with shared cache disabled, although the freezing appears >>>> to >>>> have been fixed. >>>> >>>> However, when I ask the user to send me their deck, I find that: >>>> >>>> sqlite> pragma integrity_check; >>>> integrity_check >>>> --------------- >>>> ok >>>> sqlite> select id, count(id) from cards group by id having >>>> count(id) >>>>> 1; >>>> sqlite> >>>> >>>> Any ideas? >>> >>> Triggers? >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Mar 20, 2009 at 10:00 AM, Damien Elmes <reso...@ichi2.net> >>>> wrote: >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> Some of my users have been reporting strange database problems >>>>> recently, which seem to have gone away when I removed a call to >>>>> enable_shared_cache(). The problems were noticeable in at least >>>>> 3.6.1 >>>>> and 3.6.11, when using databases of 30MB+, and doing large updates >>>>> using pysqlite. >>>>> >>>>> There were two distinct reported problems. One was that the >>>>> program >>>>> would just freeze, with no disk access and CPU usage, seemingly in >>>>> the >>>>> middle of a DB query, on Win32. I wasn't able to reproduce this on >>>>> Linux. >>>>> >>>>> The other problem was reported by both win32 and mac users, and >>>>> again >>>>> I wasn't able to reproduce it. It resulted in errors like this: >>>>> >>>>> sqlalchemy.exceptions.IntegrityError: (IntegrityError) PRIMARY KEY >>>>> must be unique 'update cards set isDue = 0 where type in (0,1,2) >>>>> and >>>>> priority = 0 and isDue = 1' {} >>>>> >>>>> .. which is strange, because the primary key on that table is >>>>> called >>>>> 'id' and is not affected by the update call. >>>>> >>>>> I also had some reports of DB corruption on OSX, but I'm not >>>>> sure if >>>>> that occurred since I upgrade to 3.6.11. >>>>> >>>>> One other hint is that while I'd been using shared cache mode >>>>> for at >>>>> least 6 months or more, these problems seem to have only surfaced >>>>> recently. I'm not sure if that's due to a change in the queries >>>>> I've >>>>> been doing, or the fact that I changed the cache size to a bigger >>>>> number, and changed the page size to 4096. >>>>> >>>>> Anyway, disabling the shared cache appears to have fixed the >>>>> problem, >>>>> and since my program is single threaded and has no need for the >>>>> shared >>>>> cache, it's not an issue for us anymore. But I thought it's worth >>>>> reporting. Have there been any other instances of problems with >>>>> the >>>>> shared cache mode? >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> >>>>> Damien >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> sqlite-users mailing list >>>> sqlite-users@sqlite.org >>>> http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> sqlite-users mailing list >>> sqlite-users@sqlite.org >>> http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users >>> >> > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users@sqlite.org > http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
