On 7 Jun 2018, at 5:25am, Dianne Dunn wrote:
> Hey there do you know how I can get off this list.??
Click the link that appears at the bottom of every post.
Simon.
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
On Behalf Of Dianne Dunn
>Sent: Wednesday, 6 June, 2018 22:25
>To: SQLite mailing list
>Subject: Re: [sqlite] Size of the SQLite library
>
>Hey there do you know how I can get off this list.??
>
>Sent from my iPad
>
>> On Jun 5, 2018, at 3:50 AM, Robert M. Münch
> wrote
Hey there do you know how I can get off this list.??
Sent from my iPad
> On Jun 5, 2018, at 3:50 AM, Robert M. Münch
> wrote:
>
>> On 31 May 2018, at 19:15, Richard Hipp wrote:
>>
>> But more recently, mobile phone designers are telling me things like
>> "try to keep the size under 5
On 06/06/18 09:24, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> A local tool which makes it easy to configure sqlite from local files
> sounds useful ...
It already exists. It is what the SQLite team uses to produce the
amalgamations etc, and is part of the SQLite code base.
> but depending on a "web site"
I recommend a mixture of the following two solutions:
On 6 Jun 2018, at 5:05pm, Roger Binns wrote:
> That is why I advocate a web site where the user (un)ticks what they
> want, and the web site provides a correctly configured download.
6 Jun 2018, at 5:24pm, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> A local
On Wednesday, 6 June, 2018 10:24, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> The build strategy for the Python APSW extension is an
> example of unwanted dependency and loss of control.
> Building of software from source code should always be
> under the complete control of the person who is performing
> the
On Wed, 6 Jun 2018, Roger Binns wrote:
That is why I advocate a web site where the user (un)ticks what they
want, and the web site provides a correctly configured download. This
will also tell the SQLite developers what features are configured. (eg
if everyone turns off virtual tables that is
On 05/06/18 15:07, Warren Young wrote:
> All right, so include [multi-component source control and build process] ...
I'm still not sure what point you are trying to make. Yes *you* can do
that. Should *every* SQLite user who wants non-default options *have*
to go through a similar amount of
On Jun 5, 2018, at 2:24 PM, Roger Binns wrote:
>
> For example to exclude virtual tables from SQLite, you can't just add a
> compile time option and be done. You have to regenerate from the
> grammar (so it is no longer valid SQL syntax and no longer has calls to
> virtual table relevant
On 01/06/18 13:46, Warren Young wrote:
> Your jQuery example later on doesn’t much apply here, for several reasons:
Note that I was showing how the site let you choose whatever features
you want, and then gave you a download matching exactly that.
> 1. JavaScript is a dynamic language, while C
On 31 May 2018, at 19:15, Richard Hipp wrote:
> But more recently, mobile phone designers are telling me things like
> "try to keep the size under 5 megabytes, if you can, please."
>
> Based on those more recent conversations, I'm thinking that we have
> more headroom that we have had
"You are soo, bloated," said Java.
On Thu, May 31, 2018, 11:58 R Smith wrote:
>
> On 2018/05/31 5:17 PM, ven...@intouchmi.com wrote:
> > I have to agree with Bob!
> >
> > We have considered SQLITE for our project. Going over 500Kbytes puts it
> > just beyond the size of our Flash - the
On May 31, 2018, at 6:32 PM, Roger Binns wrote:
>
> On 31/05/18 10:15, Richard Hipp wrote:
>> Size is still important. But having useful features is important too.
>> I'm continuing to work to find the right balance between these
>> competing goals.
>
> A pattern used in other projects is to
1. Define in documentation as < 1Mb. (Don't have to visit again.)
2. Continue to strive to keep in the 0.5-1MB range.
3. Add some information on building a MINIMUM size for those
concerned that is relatively easy to accomplish without
a lot of expertise if possible.
danap.
On 31/05/18 10:15, Richard Hipp wrote:
> Size is still important. But having useful features is important too.
> I'm continuing to work to find the right balance between these
> competing goals.
A pattern used in other projects is to have standard downloads, as well
as custom ones. With the
>On Thursday, 31 May, 2018 10:19, Dominique Devienne said:
>Given where the conversation is going, let me point out that many do
>not care one bit about the lib's size :)
>I'd much rather have an SQLite with tons of features, than forego
>those in the name saving a few bytes, to save a few
Discussion of SQLite Database
Sent: Thursday, May 31, 2018, 18:18:51
Subject: [sqlite] Size of the SQLite library
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 3:44 PM Richard Hipp wrote:
> For many years, we have boasted that the size of the SQLite library is
> "less than half a megabyte".
Given where
On 5/31/18, Simon Slavin wrote:
>
> Did you know that less than half of SQLite installations are on desktop
> computers ? My guess is that mobile phones are now the biggest category of
> devices. They run off battery power. They have firmware on chips. The
> more chips they have to keep
On 31 May 2018, at 5:18pm, Dominique Devienne wrote:
> On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 3:44 PM Richard Hipp wrote:
>
>> For many years, we have boasted that the size of the SQLite library is
>> "less than half a megabyte".
>
> Given where the conversation is go
On May 31, 2018 12:18:51 PM EDT, Dominique Devienne wrote:
>On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 3:44 PM Richard Hipp wrote:
>
>> For many years, we have boasted that the size of the SQLite library
>is
>> "less than half a megabyte".
>>
>
>Given where the conversat
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 3:44 PM Richard Hipp wrote:
> For many years, we have boasted that the size of the SQLite library is
> "less than half a megabyte".
>
Given where the conversation is going, let me point out that many do not
care one bit about the lib's size :)
I
On Thu, May 31, 2018 at 11:38 AM, Richard Hipp wrote:
> [...]
> By using multiple SQLITE_OMIT compile-time options to leave out
> features, I can get the size down to 308,189 bytes using gcc-7 -Os
> -m32.
@Richard can you elaborate some more on how you make this kind of a build?
I wouldn't mind
On 2018/05/31 5:17 PM, ven...@intouchmi.com wrote:
I have to agree with Bob!
We have considered SQLITE for our project. Going over 500Kbytes puts it
just beyond the size of our Flash - the current Firmware.
I stand corrected! It seems the embedded systems with still an extremely
limited
>
> See https://sqlite.org/tmp/size-20180531.jpg for the library size
> trend over 5 years.
Maybe your graph should have three lines.
1. Minimum SQLite with all off
2. Default SQLite
3. Maximum SQLite with all on
Sincerely
Christian
--
Read our blog about news on our plugins:
On 5/31/18, ven...@intouchmi.com wrote:
>
> We have considered SQLITE for our project. Going over 500Kbytes puts it
> just beyond the size of our Flash - the current Firmware.
By using multiple SQLITE_OMIT compile-time options to leave out
features, I can get the size down to 308,189 bytes
I have to agree with Bob!
We have considered SQLITE for our project. Going over 500Kbytes puts it
just beyond the size of our Flash - the current Firmware.
Vance
On 2018-05-31 11:04, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
> On Thu, 31 May 2018, R Smith wrote:
>
>> Nice idea, but to be honest, I can't
On Thu, 31 May 2018, R Smith wrote:
Nice idea, but to be honest, I can't remember when last someone cared about
"Kilobytes", and I mean embedded people, not big OSes.
I work on embedded projects and we do definitely worry about
"kilobytes". This is even though our embedded projects have
On 2018/05/31 3:44 PM, Richard Hipp wrote:
For many years, we have boasted that the size of the SQLite library is
"less than half a megabyte". That will likely still be true in the
3.24.0 release, though just barely. Compiling with gcc 5.4.0 and -Os
on ubuntu, I get 499,709 bytes.
For many years, we have boasted that the size of the SQLite library is
"less than half a megabyte". That will likely still be true in the
3.24.0 release, though just barely. Compiling with gcc 5.4.0 and -Os
on ubuntu, I get 499,709 bytes. With gcc 7.1.0 and -Os I get 496,399
bytes.
T
29 matches
Mail list logo
