3 November 2014, 13:56:36, by "Richard Hipp" <d...@sqlite.org>: > On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 6:48 AM, Clemens Ladisch wrote: > > > Paul wrote: > > > Are additional indices, created for WITHOUT ROWID, potentially less > > > efficient and more cumbersome? > > > > For tables with a rowid, the index stores the indexed columns and the > > rowid. For WITHOUT ROWID tables, the index stores the indexed columns > > and the primary key. > > > > And, lookup by rowid is (usually) faster than lookup by arbitrary primary > key. So, yes, WITHOUT ROWIDs might be a little slower when using secondary > indexes. > > But in a complex system, many factors come into play. It is best to give > it a try. > > Realize that any schema that works with WITHOUT ROWID on a table, will work > just as well with the WITHOUT ROWID omitted. So you can test your > application both with and without the WITHOUT ROWID clause and see which > gives the better performance, without making any changes to your internal > queries. >
Thank you, for clarification, Dr. Hipp. I'll definitely give it a try, especially after the fact that they (tables) work identically. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
