2016-04-16 16:00 GMT+02:00 R Smith <rsmith at rsweb.co.za>: > > > On 2016/04/16 3:39 PM, Cecil Westerhof wrote: > >> 2016-04-16 14:52 GMT+02:00 R Smith <rsmith at rsweb.co.za>: >> >> -- 2016-04-16 14:44:55.054 | [Success] Script Success. >>> >>> As you can see, the INSERT obviously takes some time (even more-so if the >>> CHECK constraint is added), but the DROP Table takes almost no time >>> here... >>> >>> ?The drop is a very big difference: .7 seconds or 13. Is almost 20 times >> as >> long. Could I be doing something wrong?? >> > > The big one is still running, so we'll see - but I do think already there > is something very different. Simon might be on to something with the cache. > The journal mode should also make a difference, but not that big I think. > Once this run finishes, I will try the 10-Mil one with different journal > modes. I have never noticed a large time taken for dropping tables though, > but then I do not often drop very large tables. >
?I am known for doing strange things. ;-)? > If useful, I could share the program I am using. >> > > As long as the version is known and the modes used, the rest of the > software differences should be small - it's usually down to hardware. > ?One strange thing the commandline and DB Browser are using ?3.8.10.2 while Java is using 3.8.11. -- Cecil Westerhof
