On 08/13/2016 01:14 AM, Ward WIllats wrote:
Consider:
1. Create a new database, set the pragma page_size=512
2. Create a new database on the connection with ATTACH DATABASE
'/tmp/number_two.db' AS second;
3. Issue pragma second.page_size=4096 to try and set the page size on the
attached DB
That is a fast reply. :-D
2016-08-12 23:48 GMT+02:00 Simon Slavin :
>
> On 12 Aug 2016, at 10:34pm, Cecil Westerhof
> wrote:
>
> > In the past I worked (I think) with a database (not SQLite) where I could
> > usedAfter in the definition for ratioTotalUsed. It is not a very big
> > problem, but i
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 10:06 AM, Rousselot, Richard A
wrote:
> I, and others, have tried to compile this as a 64-bit library but it will not
> load from the command line (using .load) and gives the "Error: The specified
> module could not be found."
>
> Anyone have tips on how to resolve this?
On 12 Aug 2016, at 10:34pm, Cecil Westerhof wrote:
> In the past I worked (I think) with a database (not SQLite) where I could
> usedAfter in the definition for ratioTotalUsed. It is not a very big
> problem, but is something like that possible with SQLite?
Sorry, but you cannot do this in SQLi
At the moment I have the following table:
CREATE TABLE memUsageLine(
className TEXT NOT NULL,
pid INT NOT NULL,
timeChecked INT NOT NULL DEFAULT (strftime('%s')),
freeAfter INT NOT NULL,
freeBefore INT NOT NULL,
maxMemory INT NO
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 12:02 PM, Warren Young wrote:
> On Aug 11, 2016, at 7:50 PM, Scott Robison
> wrote:
> >
> >> It’d be a lot of work just to avoid rebuilding for 64-bit, but maybe it
> >> would be an interesting project for someone. Like a master’s university
> >> project, maybe.
> >>
> >
Consider:
1. Create a new database, set the pragma page_size=512
2. Create a new database on the connection with ATTACH DATABASE
'/tmp/number_two.db' AS second;
3. Issue pragma second.page_size=4096 to try and set the page size on the
attached DB to 4096.
4. Read back with pragma second.page
On Aug 11, 2016, at 7:50 PM, Scott Robison wrote:
>
>> It’d be a lot of work just to avoid rebuilding for 64-bit, but maybe it
>> would be an interesting project for someone. Like a master’s university
>> project, maybe.
>>
>
> At first I thought to myself that a custom memory allocator for SQ
Update to my 64-bit saga.
I was able to work with some helpful mailing list members to create a 64-bit
SQLite3.exe. Far as I can tell it works fine but unfortunately I also use the
math extension library (extensions-functions.c) in my CTE queries which is also
32-bit.
I, and others, have trie
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 6:01 PM, Chris Depetris
wrote:
>Select * FROM TABLE where ((M1 IN (0,
> 1,2,7,15,150)) AND (M2 IN (0, 1,2,7,15,150) Or M2 IS NULL )
>
> AND (M2 IN (0, 1,2,7,15,150) Or M2 IS NULL) AND (M3 IN (0, 1,2,7,15,150)
> Or
> M3 IS NULL)
>
> AND (M4 IN (
We have a table that has 10 fields that are used as in query as a key. The
fields in question are M1-M10.
M1-M10 will contain an integer of 0-5000 (may be higher). Also the values in
fields M1-M10 are always unique within the record and are usually ascending
(we can mandate this if it will help).
Dominick,
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Dominique Devienne wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 2:42 PM, Keith Medcalf wrote:
>
>> [...] The main problem with the JOIN/ON syntax is that to a casual reading
>> order is implied
>
>
> No idea what you mean here :)
>
>
>> ([...] ream of brackets [...
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 2:42 PM, Keith Medcalf wrote:
> [...] The main problem with the JOIN/ON syntax is that to a casual reading
> order is implied
No idea what you mean here :)
> ([...] ream of brackets [...]).
>
Nor what this has to do with JOIN/ON. Get off the anti-MS soapbox Keith ;)
> I'm not a manager, and I do have a few "computer skills" (I think), and I
> still find JOIN ON much more
> readable than the FROM-comma + WHERE alternative. Helps me "thread" the
> table join in my head much better.
> Definitely helps me "grok" a statement faster, so not syntax sugar to me.
> My
> AFAIK, AS is necessary in UNION, at least on some RDBMS, to have the same
> columns for all UNION'ed queries.
> So in that sense, not strictly syntax sugar. And it's of course valuable
> to
> give good names to complex expressions.
> A good name goes a long way to make "code" (of any sort) more r
On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 2:55 AM, Keith Medcalf wrote:
>
> AS is optional as it was "syntactic sugar" added to SQL [...]
>
AFAIK, AS is necessary in UNION, at least on some RDBMS, to have the same
columns for all UNION'ed queries.
So in that sense, not strictly syntax sugar. And it's of course va
16 matches
Mail list logo
