On 10 Nov 2013, at 12:05pm, Raheel Gupta <raheel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I can't think of any other single feature that would remove the "lite"
>
> I am not a database expert. If you say so, it must be the case.
> But if there is a way to implement concurrent writers in SQLite maintaining
> the "lite" in SQLite, I would be the most happiest person here :)
The main reason you seem to prefer SQLite to other databases is that it's
faster. Adding row-level locking to SQLite would slow it down a lot. As a
very simplified explanation, for one SELECT instead of
try to lock the database
check to see that the lock on the database is yours
FOR EACH ROW:
figure out where the row's data is
read the data
unlock the database
you have to do
FOR EACH ROW:
figure out where the row's data is
try to lock the row
check to see that the lock on the row is yours
read the data
release the row
If your SELECT returns 10 rows you end up doing 50 operations instead of 23.
Which would mean that SQLite was half the speed, and no longer had any
advantages for you, so you would use something else.
Locking is the single hardest thing to get right when writing a DBMS. SQLite
gets a lot of its tininess and speed by implementing the simplest fastest
method of locking possible.
Simon.
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
