Persistent views across databases supported in old versions of SQLite and
can be allowed in current version by this patch:
http://sqlite.mobigroup.ru/fdiff?v1=b4464923c51570bev2=6d077a9491474827
Temp view across databases are supported always.
2010/10/1 John Drescher dresche...@gmail.com
I see
On 01-10-10 22:30, Igor Tandetnik wrote:
Andy Chambersachambers.h...@gmail.com wrote:
Given the following
create table events (
id,
date,
status
);
insert into events values ('001','a','N');
insert into events values ('001','b','N');
insert into events values ('001','c','Y');
On Oct 1, 2010, at 2:20 PM, Raj, Praveen wrote:
Hi,
I'm validating SQLite test suite version 3.7.2 on QNX operating
system. I have built the testfixture using SQLite amalgation file
and other related files/libraries.
I ran the full test suite and most of the test cases are passing,
Good day everyone.
I have two tables that contain about 5 million records. I am trying to write
an SQL command to delete rows from table A with PK (x,y,z) where PK (x,y,z)
is not in table B.
tried using NOT IN but my PK is composite.
tryingA.xB.xANDA.yB.y ANDA.zB.z would
Fadhel Al-Hashim fad...@gmail.com wrote:
I have two tables that contain about 5 million records. I am trying to write
an SQL command to delete rows from table A with PK (x,y,z) where PK (x,y,z)
is not in table B.
delete from A where not exists
(select 1 from B where A.x = B.x and A.y = B.y and
Quoth Fadhel Al-Hashim fad...@gmail.com, on 2010-10-02 14:51:59 +0300:
tryingA.xB.xANDA.yB.y ANDA.zB.z would just
hang.
Huh? How are you using that expression?
I'd use DELETE FROM a WHERE NOT EXISTS (SELECT * FROM b WHERE a.key = b.key)
with a suitable composite
I did not add indices on those columns assuming that being PK is enough? is
that right?
On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 3:08 PM, Drake Wilson dr...@begriffli.ch wrote:
Quoth Fadhel Al-Hashim fad...@gmail.com, on 2010-10-02 14:51:59 +0300:
tryingA.xB.xANDA.yB.y ANDA.zB.z would
Quoth Fadhel Al-Hashim fad...@gmail.com, on 2010-10-02 15:15:29 +0300:
I did not add indices on those columns assuming that being PK is enough? is
that right?
Are you saying _both_ tables have that exact set of columns (ideally
in the same order, too) as their respective primary keys?
A
On 2 Oct 2010, at 1:15pm, Fadhel Al-Hashim wrote:
I did not add indices on those columns assuming that being PK is enough? is
that right?
How did you define the primary keys ? Was it PRIMARY KEY (x,y,z) ?
Simon.
___
sqlite-users mailing list
Ok, I'll settle for a list of the errors that can be returned by
the standard codebase, and particularly what SQLITE_CANTOPEN means
when the database clearly was already open.
Also, this is coming from a SELECT query, so there should be no
question of opening a transaction file.
On Sat, Oct 2, 2010 at 4:35 AM, Dave Dyer ddyer-sql...@real-me.net wrote:
Ok, I'll settle for a list of the errors that can be returned by
the standard codebase, and particularly what SQLITE_CANTOPEN means
when the database clearly was already open.
Also, this is coming from a SELECT query,
If the previous process to access the database was in the middle of a write
but crashed before the write could complete, then your read-only process
will still need to write to the database in order to clean up the mess left
behind by the prior process before it can start its query. So perhaps
If the previous process to access the database was in the middle of a write
but crashed before the write could complete, then your read-only process
will still need to write to the database in order to clean up the mess left
behind by the prior process before it can start its query. So perhaps
Hi Michael,
While indexing, the standard tokenizer treats 'play-off' as two different
words, so the indexing is exactly the same as for 'play off' or 'play, off'.
Now when querying, the query analyzer treats the hyphen as 'AND NOT', so your
query really becomes 'play AND NOT off', which
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/02/2010 12:11 PM, Dave Dyer wrote:
Neither of these fits the scenario, which is multiple readers
contending for access to a networked disk.
See the second paragraph of http://www.sqlite.org/faq.html#q5
People have repeatedly found that
2. If ignoring #1, prove that the network disk implementation is correct
before blaming SQLite.
Not trying to blame anyone here, just to gather information and ultimately
find a reliable solution.
3. Watch out for other background tag-a-longs causing weird behaviour on
Windows.
I'm well
On 2 Oct 2010, at 10:01pm, Dave Dyer wrote:
2. If ignoring #1, prove that the network disk implementation is correct
before blaming SQLite.
Not trying to blame anyone here, just to gather information and ultimately
find a reliable solution.
No problem. It is unfortunate that most network
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/02/2010 02:01 PM, Dave Dyer wrote:
Not trying to blame anyone here, just to gather information and ultimately
find a reliable solution.
Your reliable solution is to not use networked filesystems with SQLite.
Alternatives are using a database
18 matches
Mail list logo
