On Mar 4, 2010, at 4:30 PM, Brian Dantes wrote: > D. Richard Hipp wrote: > >> It is OK for different processes to use different >> temp_store_directory > >> settings. The temp_store_directory is only used for TEMP tables. It > >> does not play a roll in the persistent state of the database. > > I was worried because of this statement in the docs: > > "When the temp_store_directory setting is changed, all existing > temporary tables, indices, triggers, and viewers are immediately > deleted." > > If I have one application using the default temp_store_directory, say > /tmp, > and another that sets it explicitly to something else, does that > second > application blow away all the temporary data for the first application > sitting in /tmp?
No. > >>> I am experiencing physical DB corruption and am searching >>> for possible explanations. >> Is the corruption repeatable? What version of SQLite are you >> running? > > No, unfortunately. 3.6.14.2. > > -Brian Dantes > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Brian Dantes >> Sent: Thursday, March 04, 2010 1:10 PM >> To: 'sqlite-users@sqlite.org' >> Subject: Different temp_store_directory settings okay? >> >> Is it okay for two different *processes* using >> independent connections to the same database two >> have different values for the temp_store_directory >> pragma? >> >> The docs make it clear this is not okay for two >> *threads* in the same process -- but for two >> processes is not so clear. >> >> I am experiencing physical DB corruption and am searching >> for possible explanations. >> >> Brian Dantes > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users@sqlite.org > http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users D. Richard Hipp d...@hwaci.com _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
