Geoff Simonds wrote:
Thanks to everyone for all the help on this problem. I am going to try
creating a new thread to touch the tables at startup.
Chris Schirlinger wrote:
We have the same issue, to get around it we fire a thread when the
program starts, intelligently "touching" every table
Thanks to everyone for all the help on this problem. I am going to try
creating a new thread to touch the tables at startup.
Chris Schirlinger wrote:
We have the same issue, to get around it we fire a thread when the
program starts, intelligently "touching" every table that the user is
We have the same issue, to get around it we fire a thread when the
program starts, intelligently "touching" every table that the user is
likely to access (As Michael Sizaki already mentioned a select
count(last_column) from big_table; will do it)
Since a user is very unlikely to run a program
Geoff Simonds wrote:
The app is running on Windows XP machines
Is it possible that indexing services are enabled and XP is trying to
index the database file?
t; -Clark
CC> - Original Message
CC> From: Geoff Simonds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC> To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
CC> Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 7:52:55 AM
CC> Subject: Re: [sqlite] Slow query after reboot
CC> My table contains about 500,000 rows and 4 columns, not al
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 7:52:55 AM
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Slow query after reboot
My table contains about 500,000 rows and 4 columns, not all that much
data. The overall size of the db file is 35 mb. Does 15 - 20 seconds
sound right t
Thanks for the info and suggestions Michael. I will give this a try.
Michael Sizaki wrote:
Geoff Simonds wrote:
My table contains about 500,000 rows and 4 columns, not all that much
data. The overall size of the db file is 35 mb. Does 15 - 20
seconds sound right to load from disk into
Geoff Simonds wrote:
My table contains about 500,000 rows and 4 columns, not all that much
data. The overall size of the db file is 35 mb. Does 15 - 20 seconds
sound right to load from disk into memory?
Yes it does. The problem is, that your query is probably
not reading sequentially from
- Original Message -
From: "Geoff Simonds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
My table contains about 500,000 rows and 4 columns, not all that much
data. The overall size of the db file is 35 mb. Does 15 - 20 seconds
sound right to load from disk into memory?
I can't tell you that until the
My table contains about 500,000 rows and 4 columns, not all that much
data. The overall size of the db file is 35 mb. Does 15 - 20 seconds
sound right to load from disk into memory?
Robert Simpson wrote:
- Original Message - From: "Geoff Simonds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The app is
- Original Message -
From: "Geoff Simonds" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The app is running on Windows XP machines and I assume that disk files are
cached. The strange thing is that the time it takes for the initial read
into RAM after install and first use is significantly shorter than
The app is running on Windows XP machines and I assume that disk files
are cached. The strange thing is that the time it takes for the initial
read into RAM after install and first use is significantly shorter than
after a reboot. For example, if you just installed the app and start
it, the
On 1/19/06, Geoff Simonds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have created a client application that is always running on a users
> desktop. The application accepts user input and then uses SQLite to
> perform a few simple queries against a single db file that contains 4
> tables. The performance is
I have created a client application that is always running on a users
desktop. The application accepts user input and then uses SQLite to
perform a few simple queries against a single db file that contains 4
tables. The performance is fantastic after the initial install and
normal usage. When the
14 matches
Mail list logo
