Begin forwarded message:
> From: sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org > Date: November 12, 2009 1:55:07 PM EST > To: sqlite-users-ow...@sqlite.org > Subject: Content filtered message notification > > The attached message matched the sqlite-users mailing list's content > filtering rules and was prevented from being forwarded on to the list > membership. You are receiving the only remaining copy of the > discarded message. > > > From: Marien Zwart <m_zw...@123mail.org> > Date: November 12, 2009 1:55:01 PM EST > To: General Discussion of SQLite Database <sqlite-users@sqlite.org> > Subject: Re: [sqlite] Fwd: failing attempts at sending "Feature > request: PRAGMA maximum_file_format" > > > On Thu, 2009-11-12 at 13:37 -0500, D. Richard Hipp wrote: >> On Nov 12, 2009, at 1:30 PM, D. Richard Hipp wrote: >>>> >>>> To write more future-proof code I would like to have something like >>>> PRAGMA default_file_format or PRAGMA maximum_file_format that >>>> lets me >>>> explicitly specify the highest file format version SQLite will use >>>> for >>>> new databases. >>>> >>>> Does this sound like something worth adding? >> >> Not to me. >> >> Why don't you just use the default (file format 1)? It works great >> with every version of SQLite back to 3.0.0. Do you have some unusual >> requirement for descending indices or something? > > I figured the newer format would not have been added if it was not > normally better than format 1 in size and/or performance, and would > like > to take advantage of this without having to worry about backwards > compatibility (or at least not much). I must admit I have not tried to > measure the performance or size difference: I'm just assuming there is > one, and with this feature I could take advantage of it with very > little > cost. > > -- > Marien. > > D. Richard Hipp d...@hwaci.com _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
