On Feb 21, 2009, at 5:57 AM, Clark Christensen wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> In the docs for ATTACH, I see this information:
>
> Transactions involving multiple attached databases are atomic,
> assuming that the main database is not ":memory:". If the main
> database is ":memory:" then
> transactions continue to be atomic within each individual
> database file. But if the host computer crashes in the middle
> of a COMMIT where two or more database files are updated,
> some of those files might get the changes where others
> might not.
>
> I'm looking for clarification on the last sentence:
>
> "But if the host computer crashes in the middle
> of a COMMIT where two or more database files are updated,
> some of those files might get the changes where others
> might not."
>
> If both the main database, and the attached database(s) are disk-
> based, is there more risk of data loss during a crash in the middle
> of a COMMIT than with a single database file?
Possibly slightly more. But committing a multi-file transaction when the
main database is disk-based is officially considered a safe thing to do
(whereas a multi-file transaction where the main database is in-memory
is
not).
Dan.
___
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
