Having just glanced at the documentation for ZIPVFS (didn't even know it
existed)...
1) Perhaps using a real-time compression algorithm, something like lz4.
It's not clear to me which algorithm ZIPVFS uses by default.
2) Perhaps increasing the cache settings to cache more pages in memory.
3)
HI,all
SQLite retrieves the compressed records is slower than the uncompressed
records about 30%.
How can improve the problem? and anyone any suggustion?
best regards
wqg
I know the reason why "PRAGMA mmap_size" could not improve the speed of
retrieving records from ZIPVFS DB.
However, I find sqlite3_soft_heap_limit64() , cache_szie and so on also which
could not help improve the speed.
Is all because of the ZIPVFS?
At 2015-12-23 12:34:33, "Richard
Thank D. Richard Hipp very much.
I can understand what you said. That is very helpful for me.
Best regards
At 2015-12-23 12:34:33, "Richard Hipp" wrote:
>On 12/22/15, ??? <2004wqg2008 at 163.com> wrote:
>>What do you mean of "render the mmap_size mote "?
>
>The "PRAGMA mmap_size"
Hi all,
What I meant to ask was:
a) Either an ORDER BY clause/equivalent for group_concat() [not GROUP BY as
originally posted], or an assurance that the kludge of sorting a sub-query first
and then grouping the result does and will continue to work - I need this
functionality.
This is what
>Setting the mmap_size will normally help read performance a lot.
>However, if you are reading from a ZIPVFS database, the extra layer of
>decryption and decompression that sits in between the disk and your
>application will render the mmap_size mote - it won't matter.
Thanks very much. What
>> >pragma mmap_size= 51200;
>> >Pragma page_size = 8192;
>> >Vacuum;
>> >Pragma cache_size = N;
The above code has nothing to do with the speed of retrieving records,
especially the beginning retrieve records from database.
Is this the right?
At 2015-12-23 11:00:44, "???"
Hi All,
We are using SQLite - Shared Cache for this we want to open two connection
one from .Net and Another from C++ lib, both running in the same .Net
process.
Problem:
It seems both the connections are using their own cache. even though we
have opened them using same URI.
Below is the
>How long does it take to retrieve one record from the database?
>How long do you want it to take?
The faster,the better.
At 2015-12-23 10:58:13, "Keith Medcalf" wrote:
>
>How long does it take to retrieve one record from the database?
>How long do you want it to take?
>
>> -Original
>pragma mmap_size= 51200;
>Pragma page_size = 8192;
>Vacuum;
>Pragma cache_size = N;
The testing result shows that the above pragma statements could not improve
the speed of retrieving records from data base.
Best regards
wqg
At 2015-12-21 18:29:37, "Quan Yong Zhai" wrote:
>pragma
??? <2004wqg2008 at 163.com> wrote:
> HI,all
> SQLite retrieves the compressed records is slower than the uncompressed
> records about 30%.
> How can improve the problem? and anyone any suggustion?
>
> best regards
> wqg
What is your SQLite page size? If you access small
On 23 Dec 2015, at 4:46am, ??? <2004wqg2008 at 163.com> wrote:
> sqlite3_soft_heap_limit64() , cache_szie and so on also which could not help
> improve the speed
These commands reduce the amount of memory your application uses. They will
not help increase the speed unless you are repeatedly
On 12/23/15, ??? <2004wqg2008 at 163.com> wrote:
> HI,all
> SQLite retrieves the compressed records is slower than the uncompressed
> records about 30%.
> How can improve the problem? and anyone any suggustion?
>
Have you run your system in a profiler to determine where the extra
30%
On 12/22/15, Zeeshan Hussain wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> We are using SQLite - Shared Cache for this we want to open two connection
> one from .Net and Another from C++ lib, both running in the same .Net
> process.
>
> Problem:
> It seems both the connections are using their own cache. even though we
>
14 matches
Mail list logo
