As you can tell, I don't have much experience with sql. I was going in the timeout direction because simply resending the command several seconds after the locked error occurred seemed to return the correct value. My plan is to implement Michael's suggestion and if the error continues to occur, place a rollback in an error handler and move on from there. Is that reasonable or am I still missing something?
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Jay A. Kreibich <j...@kreibi.ch> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 09:39:31AM -0400, John scratched on the wall: > > Thank you Michael. I can't find anything in the documentation about the > > -cmd switch. Will you point me in the right direction? Also, a 2 second > > timeout would be .timeout 2000 , right? > > Do understand that this will not solve every problem. Even with a > timeout, there are situations when you can still get a locking error > and your only choice is to rollback and try again. > > -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 > _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
