Re: [sqlite] Timestamps from different timezones

2013-11-23 Thread Keith Medcalf
>My SQL statements look like this: >SELECT datetime('2012-05-06T18:57:41-01:00'); > >Is there a clever way to convert these datetimestamps into standard UTC ? The select returns a timestamp in UTC, not in localtime. If you want localtime you need to specify that: SELECT

Re: [sqlite] Timestamps from different timezones

2013-11-23 Thread Christopher Vance
You absolutely cannot do this automatically unless you know the source of each timestamp, any maybe not even then. Just as a f'rinstance, there are at least 3 different meanings for EST, and 2 of them are in the same country: try -0500, +1000, +1100 for a start. On 24 November 2013 10:53, Bernie

Re: [sqlite] Nested transactions

2013-11-23 Thread Simon Slavin
On 23 Nov 2013, at 11:35pm, Darren Duncan wrote: > On 2013.11.23 7:20 AM, Simon Slavin wrote: >> Had the person who devised SQL thought it through, he'd have thought up >> savepoints instead of transactions and we wouldn't use transactions at all. > > This is an

[sqlite] Timestamps from different timezones

2013-11-23 Thread Bernie Reiter
Dear List, I receive data records from various sources. I can't influence their formats. These data records are containing datetimestamps like this (without the doublequotes): "06-May-12 18:57:41 BST" "Nov-22-13 22:58:10 PST" "23-Nov-13 08:56:57 GMT" "22.11.13    00:33:32 MEZ" "23-Nov-13

Re: [sqlite] Nested transactions

2013-11-23 Thread Darren Duncan
On 2013.11.23 7:20 AM, Simon Slavin wrote: Had the person who devised SQL thought it through, he'd have thought up savepoints instead of transactions and we wouldn't use transactions at all. This is an interesting proposal, and makes a lot of sense to me, especially given that savepoints

Re: [sqlite] Nested transactions

2013-11-23 Thread Simon Slavin
On 23 Nov 2013, at 8:41am, Igor Korot wrote: > I > don't have to use SAVEPOINT/RELEASE in this case. Savepoints /is/ nested transactions. At least the effect is the same. Had the person who devised SQL thought it through, he'd have thought up savepoints instead of

Re: [sqlite] SQLite version 3.8.2 running 2.5x faster for some queries.

2013-11-23 Thread Richard Hipp
On Sat, Nov 23, 2013 at 5:26 AM, Pepijn Van Eeckhoudt < pep...@vaneeckhoudt.net> wrote: > Is datetime special in thuis context or will constant expression hoisting > like this happen for any function? > SQLite must know that the function always gives the same output given the same inputs. No

Re: [sqlite] Nested transactions

2013-11-23 Thread Darren Duncan
On 2013.11.23 1:31 AM, Clemens Ladisch wrote: Igor Korot wrote: If I understand correctly, I can do this (pseudo-code): BEGIN TRANSACTION; // some SQL statements BEGIN TRANSACTION; sqlite> begin; begin; Error: cannot start a transaction within a transaction This scenario will not end up

Re: [sqlite] SQLite version 3.8.2 running 2.5x faster for some queries.

2013-11-23 Thread Pepijn Van Eeckhoudt
Is datetime special in thuis context or will constant expression hoisting like this happen for any function? Pepijn > Op 22-nov.-2013 om 15:35 heeft Richard Hipp het volgende > geschreven: > > The www.sqlite.org server logs are stored in an SQLite database (of > course). We

Re: [sqlite] Nested transactions

2013-11-23 Thread Clemens Ladisch
Igor Korot wrote: > If I understand correctly, I can do this (pseudo-code): > > BEGIN TRANSACTION; > // some SQL statements > BEGIN TRANSACTION; sqlite> begin; begin; Error: cannot start a transaction within a transaction > This scenario will not end up with with unfinished transaction and I >

[sqlite] Nested transactions

2013-11-23 Thread Igor Korot
If I understand correctly, I can do this (pseudo-code): BEGIN TRANSACTION; // some SQL statements BEGIN TRANSACTION; // some more SQL statements IF (more SQL statements == SUCCESS ) COMMIT; END / no need to ROLLBACK here, it will be done in the outer transaction IF( SQL statements ==