Linux 64-bit little-endian
All memory allocations freed - no leaks
Maximum memory usage: 9267208 bytes
Current memory usage: 0 bytes
Number of malloc() : -1 calls
Excellent.
--
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
UNIX and Linux spoken
GreyBeard and suspenders optional
Forwarded
21 testwordend
189 thread
2 unthreaded
2 wideBiggerThanInt
504 win
4 winVista
I'll take a look at https://sqlite.org/src/info/b0b655625cf491c8 and get
a build going here shortly.
Thank you very much Sir.
--
Dennis Cla
plementations of the cylon ( BattleStar
Gallactica and not the cool show either ) red eyes. Which was worth the
price just to see them all going bonkers.
Anyways .. yeah ... C and Fortran ( lots ) and Pascal but we don't talk
about that.
--
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
UNIX and
*/
Thanks !! I needed that. I have been pouring over this for two weeks
and the real issue is test suite.
--
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
UNIX and Linux spoken
GreyBeard and suspenders optional
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users
of malloc() : -1 calls
boe13$
Let me know if there is anything else I can try here.
--
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
UNIX and Linux spoken
GreyBeard and suspenders optional
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
http
multitude of architectures ( risc / cisc / big endian
/ little endian and 32 and 64 bit ) which tends to reveal issues.
--
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
UNIX and Linux spoken
GreyBeard and suspenders optional
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sq
ve not check on IBM Power not FreeBSD with LLVM/Clang but
that is on my todo list. Ultimately I am trying to get to FreeBSD on a
RISC-V platform here but that is a long way off. Next month I hope. In
any case should I be seeing these failures ?
--
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
UNIX a
al 410.99
user 376.39
sys 20.77
boe13$
Should we be concerned or are these artifacts from trunk/head/current?
--
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
UNIX and Linux spoken
GreyBeard and suspenders optional
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sql
On 11/20/19 1:04 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
On 11/20/19, Dennis Clarke wrote:
However the tests fail repeatedly with a code dump :
Unable to reproduce the problem. What do you get when you run:
./testfixture test/walvfs.test
What version of TCL are you linking against?
For casual
On 11/20/19 3:45 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
On 11/20/19, Dennis Clarke wrote:
In any case feels like a real problem.
I am unable to reproduce the problem here. Can you run it under
valgrind to see if that provides any other clues?
I will give that a try.
Dennis
On 11/20/19 1:04 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
On 11/20/19, Dennis Clarke wrote:
However the tests fail repeatedly with a code dump :
Unable to reproduce the problem. What do you get when you run:
./testfixture test/walvfs.test
What version of TCL are you linking against?
For casual
On 11/20/19 12:12 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
On 11/19/19, Dennis Clarke wrote:
CC=/opt/bw/gcc9/bin/gcc
CFLAGS=-std=iso9899:1999 -O0 -m64 -g -march=k8 -mtune=k8 \
-Wl,-rpath=/opt/bw/lib,--enable-new-dtags -fno-builtin \
-malign-double -mpc80
CPPFLAGS=-I/opt/bw/include -D_POSIX_PTHREAD_SEMANTICS
nwhile {![eof stdin]} {\nif {$line!=\"\"} {\nputs
-nonewline \"> \"\n} else {\nputs -nonewl"...)
at /opt/bw/build/nist/tcl8.7a1/generic/tclBasic.c:6983
#28 0x00468e38 in main (argc=4, argv=0x7ffde61bd908)
at
/opt/bw/build/sqlite-src-3300100_rhel_74_3.10.0-
On 11/20/19 2:26 AM, Warren Young wrote:
On Nov 19, 2019, at 7:06 PM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
gmake: *** [Makefile:1256: tcltest] Segmentation fault (core dumped)
…
CC=/opt/bw/gcc9/bin/gcc
You’re using a nonstandard compiler (i.e. not provided by Red Hat) with
non-default options
some other system such as good ol' strict POSIX Solaris 10
with the Oracle Studio 12.6 tools and that is with insanely strict
C99 compiler but can not get a good result on RHEL. Which is maddening.
Even with a new shiney gcc.
Would love to hear your thoughts.
--
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/
On 11/19/19 12:32 AM, Scott Robison wrote:
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 3:44 PM Dennis Clarke wrote:
Same question as a few days ago.
This may have been asked many times before but always seems to be a
valid question. On some machines with different compilers I get good
results using C99 strict
results.
Also I am using a variety of LLVM/Clang and also GCC 8.x and 9.x as
well as Oracle Studio 12.6 and also a few tests with less obvious
compilers. This would be on 32-bit i386 and 32-bit armv7 and 64-bit
ppc64 and Fujitsu sparcv9 and AMD Opteron and Intel x86_64 various
types.
--
Dennis Clarke
of LLVM/Clang and also GCC 8.x and 9.x as
well as Oracle Studio 12.6 and also a few tests with less obvious
compilers. This would be on 32-bit i386 and 32-bit armv7 and 64-bit
ppc64 and Fujitsu sparcv9 and AMD Opteron and Intel x86_64 various
types.
--
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
UNIX
ing errors. No output written to testfixture
gmake: *** [Makefile:1199: testfixture] Error 2
Current version does not build at all.
Still locked in battle here on a few systems trying to get current
release to build anywhere and thus far Solaris and RHEL both fail with
references to tcl stuff in sq
On 2019-11-07 11:44, Shawn Wagner wrote:
... Just don't use strict c99 mode when compiling with gcc? Drop the -std
argument from your CFLAGS to use the default (gnu11 since gcc 5) or
explicitly use gnu99, which gives you that version of the C standard + gcc
extensions.
(Not that they have
On 2019-11-07 11:15, Shawn Wagner wrote:
Does that toolchain use gcc, or a different compiler? If gcc, are you using
the same CFLAGS as on the redhat box (you're turning on a bunch of extra
non-default options there)?
I don't see how --with-threads can be a concern. The other options do
not
On 2019-11-07 11:01, Shawn Wagner wrote:
Compiling with -std=iso9899:1999 is the culprit. Strict c99 mode disables
gcc extensions like inline asm.
OKay but I have no issues doing a compile on a Solaris server using the
Oracle Studio 12.6 tools and strict C99. So how is C99 the issue?
Dennis
e,a,b,c, 2);
Rl0(c,d,e,a,b, 3);
.
.
.
This all seems very strange as sqlite is usually a rock of gibraltar
stable and easy process to get built and tested.
What dumb thing did I do here ?
--
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
UNIX and Linux spoken
GreyBeard and suspenders optional
__
system arch/type are you using? Is it rv64imafdc on a qemu type or
a SiFive? Is it Linux or FreeBSD ?
--
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
UNIX and Linux spoken
GreyBeard and suspenders optional
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users
.
Why not merely use the data from :
struct timespec tn;
ec = clock_gettime( CLOCK_REALTIME, );
That should give some sort of data down to the nanosec and if you have
decent ntp in place ( and black magic ) it may even be accurate. :-)
--
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
UNIX
On 2/6/19 7:55 PM, Ben Asher wrote:
Hi there! We're having a debate at my company about date storage in SQLite.
SQLite has builtin support for ISO8601 in its date functions, so some folks
have started storing dates as ISO8601 SQLite-compatible date strings. Are
there pitfalls to storing dates
On 1/24/19 4:17 AM, Peter da Silva wrote:
Sounds like something is using fork when it should be using vfork?
No idea. My only concern is getting the sources to build clean and then
to pass the testsuite. Which it doesn't due to one single itty bitty test.
So how does one run a single test
On 1/23/19 7:10 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
On 1/23/19, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Perhaps I was mistaken to enable --enable-tempstore=yes during configure ?
Maybe. Does it work if you omit that option?
The solution seems to be to throw hardware at the problem and then it
goes away. I
On 1/23/19 7:10 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
On 1/23/19, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Perhaps I was mistaken to enable --enable-tempstore=yes during configure ?
Maybe. Does it work if you omit that option?
I just tried without and also went back to sqlite-src-324 and they
all fail in the same
On Oracle solaris 10 sparc with 16GB of memory I was surprised to see :
.
.
.
Time: keyword1.test 229 ms
Time: lastinsert.test 64 ms
Time: laststmtchanges.test 60 ms
(82 ms - want less than 1000) (80 ms - want less than 1000) Time:
like.test 188 ms
Time: like2.test 215 ms
Time: like3.test
neatly on new shiney Oracle M-class hardware.
The point is Solaris 11.4 and Oracle Studio. Nothing else.
Dennis Clarke
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
On 1/20/19 12:50 AM, Gary R. Schmidt wrote:
On 20/01/2019 15:03, Dennis Clarke wrote:
On 1/19/19 10:55 AM, Igor Korot wrote:
Dennis,
On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 9:31 PM Dennis Clarke
wrote:
And SPARC version is still available for download...
Let us know when you get that running
On 1/19/19 10:55 AM, Igor Korot wrote:
Dennis,
On Sat, Jan 19, 2019 at 9:31 PM Dennis Clarke wrote:
And SPARC version is still available for download...
Let us know when you get that running.
Install of x86 went very smooth.
The x86_64 process is trivial.
And I was able to compile
And SPARC version is still available for download...
Let us know when you get that running.
Dennis
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
On 1/19/19 4:47 PM, Andy Goth wrote:
Dennis Clarke wrote:
On 2018-07-28 08:33, Andy Goth wrote:
SQLite 3.24.0 fails to build on Solaris 9 (a.k.a. Solaris 2.9)
It may be [worth] while to spin up a Solaris 9 zone on a Solaris 10 or
Solaris 11 server for this purpose.
I don't have access
On 12/19/18 7:51 PM, James K. Lowden wrote:
On Tue, 18 Dec 2018 17:34:29 -0500
Dennis Clarke wrote:
some serious reading and experiments are needed to get a good
handle on why numerical computation is as much art as it is science.
If we wander into the problem without sufficient study
Apologies ... I should have included a link to Jean-Michel Muller's work
on "Elementary Functions" and on preserving monotonicity and always
getting correctly rounded results when implementing the elementary
functions in floating-point arithmetic.
On 12/18/18 6:01 AM, R Smith wrote:> On 2018/12/17 11:53 PM, Dennis
Clarke wrote:
>>
>> This thread is getting out of hand. Firstly there is no such binary
>> representation ( in this universe ) for a trivial decimal number such as
>> one tenth ( 0.10 ) and really fol
looked over the code and if
people were to study the actual mathematics then this whole discussion
would be moot. Okay ... so enough is enough here.
Dennis Clarke
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
http
On 11/11/18 8:38 AM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
On 11/11/18 8:25 AM, J. King wrote:
On November 11, 2018 8:04:51 AM EST, Dennis Clarke
wrote:
this : https://www.sqlite.org/whentouse.html
he.net is Hurricane Electric, an Internet backbone.
An IX ?
https://www.peeringdb.com/asn/6939
in a big
On 11/11/18 8:25 AM, J. King wrote:
On November 11, 2018 8:04:51 AM EST, Dennis Clarke
wrote:
this : https://www.sqlite.org/whentouse.html
he.net is Hurricane Electric, an Internet backbone.
An IX ?
Ah yes .. those guys ... been around forever. I should just "know that"
this : https://www.sqlite.org/whentouse.html
I know this is really a nit pick but I see that the OpenGroup folks have
published a new shiney UNIX standard called SUSv4 or Single UNIX
Specification version 4 or even ye "The Open Group Base Specifications
Issue 7, 2018 edition IEEE Std
On 11/08/2018 04:05 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
In case you are not following the ticket at...
The list mail server sends this out about thirty times. Not sure if
anyone else sees abusive duplicates from the sqlite mail list server
but I certainly do.
Dennis
INSERT INTO TestReal values (9223372036854775807);INSERT INTO
TestReal values (9223372036854775807 - 1);INSERT INTO TestReal values
(9223372036854775807 - 2);INSERT INTO TestReal values
(9223372036854775807 - 3);sqlite>...>...>...>...>
I recognize that number on sight and it
Read all of this repeatedly. Excellent post.
But if your nfs solution is configured not to lie, to honour lock and sync
Had to pop up here briefly. I ran into a number of problems with nfs
clients of various types wherein the most brutal would be VMware ESXi
hosts. Running backend network
On 07/30/2018 03:59 AM, Gary R. Schmidt wrote:
On 2018-07-28 08:33, Andy Goth wrote:
SQLite 3.24.0 fails to build on Solaris 9 (a.k.a. Solaris 2.9)
It may be work while to spin up a Solaris 9 zone on a Solaris 10 or
Solaris 11 server for this purpose. Not sure how you are getting a
cross
tests on node000 SunOS 64-bit big-endian
All memory allocations freed - no leaks
Maximum memory usage: 9275952 bytes
Current memory usage: 0 bytes
Number of malloc() : -1 calls
So now I will reproduce this across a few other systems and just be
happy.
Dennis Clarke
[1] actually rolled into product
On 06/21/2018 12:06 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
On 6/21/18, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Seems to compile fine and yet "gmake test" failed with a less
then helpful "Error 2" :
.
.
.
sqlite3.c:
"sqlite3.c", line 20826: warning: implicit function declaration:
localtime
On 06/21/2018 10:04 AM, Dan Kennedy wrote:
On 06/21/2018 02:34 PM, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Seems to compile fine and yet "gmake test" failed with a less
then helpful "Error 2" :
.
.
.
sqlite3.c:
"sqlite3.c", line 20826: warning: implicit func
Seems to compile fine and yet "gmake test" failed with a less
then helpful "Error 2" :
.
.
.
sqlite3.c:
"sqlite3.c", line 20826: warning: implicit function declaration:
localtime_r (E_NO_IMPLICIT_DECL_ALLOWED)
"sqlite3.c", line 52491: warning: statement not reached
(E_STATEMENT_NOT_REACHED)
Seems to compile fine and yet "gmake test" failed with a less
then helpful "Error 2" :
.
.
.
sqlite3.c:
"sqlite3.c", line 20826: warning: implicit function declaration:
localtime_r (E_NO_IMPLICIT_DECL_ALLOWED)
"sqlite3.c", line 52491: warning: statement not reached
(E_STATEMENT_NOT_REACHED)
On 06/13/2018 12:35 PM, skywind mailing lists wrote:
Hi Ryan,
my problem is that I use the "most safest" mode that exists for SQLite and it
still fails… Therefore, I need to know why it fails.
I have been watching this from a distance and all I can think is :
1) what do you mean
On 6/8/18 2:39 AM, Simon Slavin wrote:
On 8 Jun 2018, at 7:19am, Ron Yorston wrote:
Meh. *All* programmers of a certain age wrote their own web server.
Zawinski's Law:
"Every program attempts to expand until it can read mail."
updated for an age where everything is web-based, not
On 6/8/18 2:33 AM, Scott Robison wrote:
On Fri, Jun 8, 2018, 12:19 AM Ron Yorston wrote:
Dennis Clarke wrote:
On 6/7/18 9:59 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
On 6/7/18, Scott Doctor wrote:
Just out of curiosity, is the sqlite website using nginx or
apache as the server?
None of the above
On 6/7/18 10:29 PM, Simon Slavin wrote:
On 8 Jun 2018, at 2:59am, Richard Hipp wrote:
The web server is one that I wrote myself
Yeah. And it doesn't return a "Server:" header.
How do you NOT love that? :-)
dc
___
sqlite-users mailing list
On 6/7/18 9:59 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
On 6/7/18, Scott Doctor wrote:
Just out of curiosity, is the sqlite website using nginx or
apache as the server?
None of the above.
The web server is one that I wrote myself
You're level of cool just jumped to UNIX silverback level :-)
Dennis
On 6/7/18 5:34 PM, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jun 2018, Warren Young wrote:
Yes, I know that, but it does solve the other likely problem when
using a too-old system with HTTPS, being an inability for the client
and server to agree on a mutually-supported encryption suite. With
all of
On 05/13/2018 11:57 AM, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
The arguments here are simplified
Will you stop top posting please?
I am trying to follow along here about some x86 boxen stuff but
you are top posting madly. Also is that a single socket machine
with a single big memory bank or is it NUMA and
On 05/10/2018 01:48 PM, David Raymond wrote:
Insert usual comment of "the more you add, the less 'Lite' it becomes"
Saw this and thought "brilliant".
Exactly.
The UNIX way is to do one thing and do it well and move on.
Not seventy five things poorly.
Dennis
"Banishing" means configuring IP filters on the server to silently
discard any and all IP packets that originate from the targeted range
of IP addresses.
This is the best method that I have ever used and I can tell you that
your ipfilter rules can get quite long using this approach. In truth
On 14/09/17 02:00 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
On 9/14/17, Dennis Clarke <dcla...@blastwave.org> wrote:
RE : sqlite-autoconf-3200100
The sqlite-autoconf-3200100 tarball strips out all the tests. Maybe
grab a copy of the canonical source code
(https://sqlite.org/2017/sqlite-src-32001
Memory is cheap and most servers have plenty.
Processors are fast and most servers have multiple with many cores.
Select the entire table of columns you need into memory.
Write a little code.
No it won't scale very well into millions of rows but I could easily
Is there anything I can do to reduce the time taken?
123456789+123456789+123456789+123456789+123456789+123456789+123456789+12
> < Simon correctly advised >
> Do it in your favourite programming language rather than SQL.
Let me be even more clear :
Memory is cheap and most servers have
On 09/14/2017 02:00 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
On 9/14/17, Dennis Clarke <dcla...@blastwave.org> wrote:
RE : sqlite-autoconf-3200100
Dear maillist :
After doing a typical configure and compile on a 64-bit PPC arch
linux server I was very very surprised to see :
ppc64$ /usr/local/bin
RE : sqlite-autoconf-3200100
Dear maillist :
After doing a typical configure and compile on a 64-bit PPC arch
linux server I was very very surprised to see :
ppc64$ /usr/local/bin/gmake installcheck
gmake: Nothing to be done for `installcheck'.
ppc64$ /usr/local/bin/gmake check
gmake:
65 matches
Mail list logo
