That can work, if performance is of no concern. Otherwise it will become
miserably slow.
Von: Fehmi Noyan ISI fnoyan...@yahoo.commailto:fnoyan...@yahoo.com
Antworten an: Fehmi Noyan ISI fnoyan...@yahoo.commailto:fnoyan...@yahoo.com
Datum: Dienstag, 30. Juli 2013 01:54
An: Benjamin Stadin
Hi All,
Is there a way to minimize function calls internal to SQLite? At some points of
execution, I have measured as much as 35 deep nested function calls. Since we
are running on an embedded system, we don't support such a deep call table.
Thanks!
Andrew Beal
Hello,
with sqlite for windows store, it's possible to create database with
multiples foreign keys?
if don't, when i may expect this update?
i've tryed devart solution but the performance is so slow.
--
Trovata
.NET Developer
___
sqlite-users
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 8:00 AM, Andrew Beal ab...@whoi.edu wrote:
Hi All,
Is there a way to minimize function calls internal to SQLite? At some
points of execution, I have measured as much as 35 deep nested function
calls. Since we are running on an embedded system, we don't support such a
Richard Hipp wrote:
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 8:00 AM, Andrew Beal ab...@whoi.edu wrote:
Hi All,
Is there a way to minimize function calls internal to SQLite? At some
points of execution, I have measured as much as 35 deep nested function
calls. Since we are running on an embedded system, we
On 30 Jul 2013, at 5:04am, techi eth techi...@gmail.com wrote:
Could be many rows in many tables were corrupted. If SQLite3 knew exactly
what had been corrupted it could just go and fix it without even needing
your help.
Here i am thinking of getting details about table infected
Yes, it is slow actually. But I could not do it with SQL. I wish I could do
more with SQL than code, which would give a good performance improvement.
From overall application point of view, I may be considering using threads to
read from database, so that the performance will be improved a bit.
Richard,
Thanks for the response. We are using a custom environment without a deep call
stack due to specific hardware latency issues. How does the SQLITE_SMALL_STACK
option work with the SQLITE_ZERO_MALLOC option?
F. Andrew Beal
Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
266 Woods Hole Road MS#18
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Andrew Beal ab...@whoi.edu wrote:
Richard,
Thanks for the response. We are using a custom environment without a deep
call stack due to specific hardware latency issues.
Do you have a custom C compiler? Or is there some extant C compiler (that
I don't know
Our vendor provided a custom C compiler which is overflowing the stack with the
increased depth of the call table which then overflows into other memory.
Andrew Beal
Office: 508-289-2970
Email: ab...@whoi.edu
-Original Message-
From: sqlite-users-boun...@sqlite.org
On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 9:45 AM, Andrew Beal ab...@whoi.edu wrote:
Our vendor provided a custom C compiler which is overflowing the stack
with the increased depth of the call table which then overflows into other
memory.
Your description above is ambiguous, but I interpret it to mean that it
Sorry for the ambiguous description. You are correct that the issue is the
stack size. However, I have already maxed out our stack size and I am trying to
bring the SQLite down to within its limits which is 2K. I am implementing the
SQLITE_SMALL_STACK option and hopefully that'll bring it
On 7/30/2013 06:11, Richard Hipp wrote:
Wow. What embedded system is it that doesn't support a call stack that is
*only* 35 levels deep?
The 12-bit PIC microcontrollers are limited to 2-level stacks, and many
of the smaller 14-bit PICs are limited to 8-level stacks.
Not that I expect that
13 matches
Mail list logo
