Thanks a lot Max! -- Tito
On 21 Nov 2010, at 14:04, Max Vlasov <max.vla...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 6:31 PM, Tito Ciuro <tci...@mac.com> wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> Sounds like sqlite3_get_table() would take less time to access the storage >> subsystem as opposed to sqlite_step() with multiple roundtrips, at the >> expense of using lots more RAM, of course. So assuming RAM wasn't an issue, >> why not use sqlite3_get_table()? Why is its usage being discouraged? >> >> >> Tito, looking at the sources... sqlite3_get_table seems to be sqlite3_exec > call with a callback and sqlite3_exec is sqlite3_prepare/sqlite3_step > wrapper. So, probably no special access or performance boost > > Max Vlasov > _______________________________________________ > 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
