On 2016/05/18 12:26 AM, Jonathan wrote:
> Hi Ryan,
> Thanks for the excellent and comprehensive answer; it seems like CTE's
> are the way to go for this.
> I did a quick google and this tutorial was very helpful (for anyone
> else newly interested in CTE's -
>
> > Consider this set of integers: 1,3,5,7,42,99,83,11,83,83
> >
> > In this case, there is no subset S1 of size 3 that satisfies your
> criterion. In an SQL query, the set returned by LIMIT 3 would not be
defined
> uniquely.
>
> What you've both said is essentially the point I was trying to
On 2016/05/18 5:43 PM, James K. Lowden wrote:
> On Wed, 18 May 2016 08:32:24 +0200
> Clemens Ladisch wrote:
>
>> You get "foreign key mismatch" if you do not have the required
>> indexes, i.e., according to a comment in the source,
>> 1) The named parent key columns do not exist, or
>> 2) The
On Wed, 18 May 2016 19:06:30 +0200
R Smith wrote:
> > I'm not convinced the requirement that the referenced columns be
> > unique is justified
>
> How do you see a parent-child relationship possible where the parent
> is not Unique?
I think I can convince you that uniqueness is a good rule of
On Wed, 18 May 2016 20:29:26 +1000
"dandl" wrote:
> > 2. Otherwise, if exactly the number of specified rows must be
> > returned without other restrictions, then the result is possibly
> > indeterminate.
>
> I agree, with one tiny tweak. The SQL standard already notes that
> certain queries of
On Wed, 18 May 2016 10:41:21 +1000
"dandl" wrote:
> > You lost me at "subset S of N tuples". Which relational operator
> > takes N as an argument?
>
> Restriction determines whether a tuple should be included or not; you
> also need cardinality and less than (for comparing members).
On Wed, May 18, 2016 at 2:39 AM, Cecil Westerhof
wrote:
> I would be interested what you find wrong about Git and is better in your
> version control system.
>
git blows; monotone forever!
> --
> Cecil Westerhof
> ___
> sqlite-users mailing list
>
I've not heard of fossil so this thread piqued my interest; I currently use
Mercurial where I have a choice.
I don't seem to be able to find much about Fossil v's Mercurial. This blog post
looked interesting though:
http://www.omiyagames.com/farewell-fossil-version-control/
Despite Mercurial
On Tue, 17 May 2016, at 14:55, Markus Ecker wrote:
> PRAGMA mmap_size=0;
That, according to the documentation, means "turn off memory-mapping"
PROVIDED the database isn't in use already with memory-mapping active.
So, is the database soley in use by your integrity check when this
happens?
What
> Or we'll answer my original question by breaking down one of the above two
> options. The documentation for the implementation may simply say that the
> order will be consistent in any one database connection, without ever
saying
> what the order will be.
This is perfectly consistent with
On May 18, 2016, at 11:04 AM, Jonathan Moules
wrote:
>
> I currently use Mercurial where I have a choice.
> I don't seem to be able to find much about Fossil v's Mercurial.
Best take it up on the Fossil mailing list.
> This blog post looked interesting though:
>
On 17 May 2016, at 6:41pm, Harrington, Paul
wrote:
> I am a big fan of SQLite and the elegance and simplicity of it and fossil.
> The documentation and support are excellent.
>
> Given that the team takes a long-term perspective, I would prefer if the s/w
> was structured in a more modular
On Wed, 18 May 2016 11:39:28 +0200, Cecil Westerhof
wrote:
> I would be interested what you find wrong about Git and is better in your
> version control system.
Check the archives of the fossil-users mailing list
fossil-users at lists.fossil-scm.org
Hello,
> I would be interested what you find wrong about Git and is better in your
> version control system.
If you google - one of the first hits that come up is:
Fossil Versus Git [1]. Cheers.
[1] http://www.fossil-scm.org/xfer/doc/trunk/www/fossil-v-git.wiki
Greetings,
Can you tell me where I can find the files below?
I don't see them on the downloads page. I understand I need them.
sqlite-shell-win32-x86-3070701.zip
sqlite-dll-win32-x86-3070701.zip
Thanks,
Jack Acheff
ps - I had not heard of veracity before and on the surface it looks quite
interesting as a direct competitor to fossil, but it also looks a bit
abandoned.
On May 18, 2016, at 11:38 AM, Steve Schow wrote:
> Interesting read, thanks!
>
> I?m new to fossil, but personally I have fallen in
On Wed, 18 May 2016 08:32:24 +0200
Clemens Ladisch wrote:
> You get "foreign key mismatch" if you do not have the required
> indexes, i.e., according to a comment in the source,
> 1) The named parent key columns do not exist, or
> 2) The named parent key columns do exist, but are not subject to
?I would be interested what you find wrong about Git and is better in your
version control system.?
--
Cecil Westerhof
Interesting read, thanks!
I?m new to fossil, but personally I have fallen in love with it over the past
month or so I?ve been using it.
My reaction to git after several years of dabbling with it here or there has
been 180 degrees opposite?not love
git is a menace
On May 18, 2016, at
> On 18 May 2016, at 02:41, dandl wrote:
>
> Then you are mistaken.
> 1. Consider the following set S of integers: 1,3,5,7,42,99,83,11.
> 2. Divide it into two subsets such that S1 is of size 3 and all members of
> S1 are larger than those in S2.
>
> A sort is unnecessary -- there are many
> The "problem" is to produce 3 rows where, relationally, the only answers
have
> 2 or 4 rows. There is no right answer to the problem because there is no
> answer to the problem.
Which is what I said. The solution with 3 rows is unambiguous. You either
resolve this the way the standard does by
On 5/17/16, Markus Ecker wrote:
> Hello together!
>
> I am struggling with a memory issue of SQLite and therefore searching for
> help. The database of our product has about 70GB of data. When I call the
> "PRAGMA integrity_check" method, the memory consumption of my system
> continuously
> I am quite certain nevertheless that LIMIT has no relational basis.
> Nothing based on Order By could.
Then you are mistaken.
1. Consider the following set S of integers: 1,3,5,7,42,99,83,11.
2. Divide it into two subsets such that S1 is of size 3 and all members of
S1 are larger than those
On 5/18/16, Jack Acheff wrote:
> Greetings,
>
>
> Can you tell me where I can find the files below?
>
> I don't see them on the downloads page. I understand I need them.
You are probably better off using the latest versions from the
download page, rather than the 5-year-old versions listed
On May 18, 2016, at 4:43 AM, Kees Nuyt wrote:
>
> On Wed, 18 May 2016 11:39:28 +0200, Cecil Westerhof
> wrote:
>
>> I would be interested what you find wrong about Git and is better in your
>> version control system.
>
> Check the archives of the fossil-users mailing list
Links to a few of
On May 18, 2016, at 4:23 AM, Gerald Bauer wrote:
>
>> I would be interested what you find wrong about Git and is better in your
>> version control system.
>
> [1] http://www.fossil-scm.org/xfer/doc/trunk/www/fossil-v-git.wiki
Also http://fossil-scm.org/xfer/doc/tip/www/quotes.wiki
James K. Lowden wrote:
> I seem to be getting a foreign key check anomaly. I've checked the
> constraint mentioned in the error message (and the other one, just in
> case). Am I overlooking something, or has this been fixed since 3.8.4.1?
>
> sqlite> pragma foreign_key_check;
> Error: foreign
On 2016-05-18 2:19 AM, Stefan Evert wrote:
>> On 18 May 2016, at 02:41, dandl wrote:
>>
>> Then you are mistaken.
>> 1. Consider the following set S of integers: 1,3,5,7,42,99,83,11.
>> 2. Divide it into two subsets such that S1 is of size 3 and all members of
>> S1 are larger than those in S2.
On 18 May 2016, at 2:05am, dandl wrote:
>> The "problem" is to produce 3 rows where, relationally, the only answers
> have
>> 2 or 4 rows. There is no right answer to the problem because there is no
>> answer to the problem.
>
> Which is what I said. The solution with 3 rows is unambiguous.
Hi Ryan,
Thanks for the excellent and comprehensive answer; it seems like CTE's
are the way to go for this.
I did a quick google and this tutorial was very helpful (for anyone else
newly interested in CTE's -
30 matches
Mail list logo
