On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 11:36:12AM -0700, Kyle McKay scratched on the wall: > On Sep 17, 2010, at 16:08:42 PDT, Oliver Schneider wrote: > > just a few minutes ago I ran a VACUUM on a DB file and the size before > > was 2089610240 and afterwards 2135066624. Is this normal?
> Admittedly that's only about 0.4% growth in size, but I too was under > the impression that vacuum did not grow the database size. Subsequent > vacuum commands do not seem to grow the database any further. If you have several indexes, especially on text values (or some other variable-length value) it is conceivable that a VACUUM will increase the overall file size. This possibility will be stronger if the rows were initially inserted more or less in index order, but using explicit, non-sequential ROWID/INTEGER PRIMARY KEYs. -j -- Jay A. Kreibich < J A Y @ K R E I B I.C H > "Intelligence is like underwear: it is important that you have it, but showing it to the wrong people has the tendency to make them feel uncomfortable." -- Angela Johnson _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
