On 4 Mar 2014, at 4:14am, Donald Shepherd donald.sheph...@gmail.com wrote:
It appears that using equals on floating point (REAL) data in WHERE clauses
doesn't necessarily work, presumably because of rounding errors - see below
for an example. Is this the case? Do I need to use BETWEEN
It's a nice idea but that's just some sample values generated by an
emulator. I've compromised and am using round() to limit it to a few
digits after the decimal when doing the comparison.
On 4 March 2014 21:27, Simon Slavin slav...@bigfraud.org wrote:
On 4 Mar 2014, at 4:14am, Donald
On 4 Mar 2014, at 5:06am, romtek rom...@gmail.com wrote:
If that were true, then I wouldn't be getting a very large speed-up when
enveloping write ops in an explicit transaction, would I?
Sorry, I can't tell. It depends on how the virtual storage mechanism works.
But if your performance
On 4 Mar 2014, at 10:33am, Donald Shepherd donald.sheph...@gmail.com wrote:
It's a nice idea but that's just some sample values generated by an
emulator. I've compromised and am using round() to limit it to a few
digits after the decimal when doing the comparison.
If you're using randomly
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 3:44 AM, Simon Slavin slav...@bigfraud.org wrote:
On 4 Mar 2014, at 1:15am, romtek rom...@gmail.com wrote:
I have a question based on my observation. According to your numbers for
a
5400 RPM disk, one write op should take about 11 ms. However, it often
takes only
On 03/03/14 03:01, Alek Paunov wrote:
On 02.03.2014 21:38, Elefterios Stamatogiannakis wrote:
Under this view, the efficiency of the virtual table api is very
important. Above query only uses 2 VTs in it, but we have other queries
that use a lot more VTs than that.
Max tests in C shows 2x CPU
Could you explain some more your solution?
Does it work in this following case:
select * from VT2(select * from VT1);
by directly passing the rows from VT1 to VT2 (short-circuiting SQLite)?
What would happen in the following case?:
select * from VT2(select processrow(c1,c2,c3) from VT1);
Your VT1 table already has an xColumn implementation, possibly doing something
like
switch( p_column )
{
case 1: sqlite3_result_xxx( p_ctx, v_rec-f1, ...); break;
...
case n: sqlite3_result_xxx( p_ctx, v_rec-fn, ...); break;
Hi,
I have this code that fails always with the error output next:
=
zSql= SELECT r.name, s.content FROM resource AS r, static AS s WHERE (r.ids
= s.ids AND r.name = ?);;
stmt = NULL;
rc = sqlite3_prepare_v2(db, zSql, strlen(zSql), stmt, NULL);
if ( rc != SQLITE_OK ){
Hi,
I encounter the same issue as described here:
https://www.mail-archive.com/sqlite-users%40sqlite.org/msg57092.html
usually once or twice a day, when running a performance test-suite for my
application (using SQLite 3.8.1).
What is the correct way to handle the SQLITE_PROTOCOL errors that
On 4 Mar 2014, at 3:09pm, Eduardo Morras emorr...@yahoo.es wrote:
zSql= SELECT r.name, s.content FROM resource AS r, static AS s WHERE (r.ids
= s.ids AND r.name = ?);;
[snip]
Error on query: out of memory
I think this might require comparing every row in resource with every row in
Eleytherios Stamatogiannakis wrote
Our main test case is TPCH, a standard DB benchmark. The lineitem
table of TPCH contains 16 columns, which for 10M rows would require 160M
xColumn callbacks, to pass it through the virtual table API. These
callbacks are very expensive, especially when at
On 4 Mar 2014, at 3:15pm, Simon Slavin slav...@bigfraud.org wrote:
On 4 Mar 2014, at 3:09pm, Eduardo Morras emorr...@yahoo.es wrote:
zSql= SELECT r.name, s.content FROM resource AS r, static AS s WHERE (r.ids
= s.ids AND r.name = ?);;
[snip]
Error on query: out of memory
I think
My guess: Yes.
It would require implementing an new opcode, either only for virtual tables or
also for native tables too, that accepts a list of field numbers (currently
there are only 5 parameters possible for an opcode and some of them have fixed
meanings).
And the logic to generate theses
In our tests the bind API can acquire from the Python side more than 20
values in a single call, at the same time that xColumn acquires 2 values.
Most of the cost is in the callback and not in submitting a row's values
through bind's API .
So with the exception of queries that need only 1
Thank you for the explanation.
Answers inline.
On 04/03/14 16:16, Hick Gunter wrote:
Your VT1 table already has an xColumn implementation, possibly doing something
like
switch( p_column )
{
case 1: sqlite3_result_xxx( p_ctx, v_rec-f1, ...); break;
On 04.03.2014 15:05, Eleytherios Stamatogiannakis wrote:
On 03/03/14 03:01, Alek Paunov wrote:
It seems that the easiest optimization for this (very often) VT use case
(bulk streaming) is SQLite add-on in _C_ to be written, implementing
vtable interface specialization containing xNextPage
On 04/03/14 20:11, Alek Paunov wrote:
On 04.03.2014 15:05, Eleytherios Stamatogiannakis wrote:
On 03/03/14 03:01, Alek Paunov wrote:
It seems that the easiest optimization for this (very often) VT use case
(bulk streaming) is SQLite add-on in _C_ to be written, implementing
vtable interface
I am having compilation problems after upgrading from v3.7.6.3 to v3.8.4 on
the
static const int iLn = __LINE__+4; lines containing these statements
Tried with VS2012 and VS2013, can someone help me fix this ?
error C2099: initializer is not a constant ..\sqlite3\sqlite3.c 73531
error
On Tue, 4 Mar 2014 15:19:24 +
Simon Slavin slav...@bigfraud.org wrote:
On 4 Mar 2014, at 3:15pm, Simon Slavin slav...@bigfraud.org wrote:
On 4 Mar 2014, at 3:09pm, Eduardo Morras emorr...@yahoo.es wrote:
zSql= SELECT r.name, s.content FROM resource AS r, static AS s
WHERE (r.ids
Eduardo Morras wrote:
Trying simple SELECT r.name FROM resource AS r WHERE r.name = ? gets Out
of memory too calling preparev2.
This has nothing to do with the query itself.
If you aren't doing something funny with the memory allocator, it's likely
that SQLite's database object got corrupt by
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 2:59 PM, ioannis ioanni...@gmail.com wrote:
I am having compilation problems after upgrading from v3.7.6.3 to v3.8.4 on
the
static const int iLn = __LINE__+4; lines containing these statements
We have had any trouble here. Are you redefining __LINE__ somewhere
Hello,
what's your SharedSection value? [heap limitation]
Best Regards.
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 12:16 PM, Clemens Ladisch clem...@ladisch.de wrote:
Eduardo Morras wrote:
Trying simple SELECT r.name FROM resource AS r WHERE r.name = ? gets
Out of memory too calling preparev2.
This has
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 8:59 PM, ioannis ioanni...@gmail.com wrote:
error C2099: initializer is not a constant ..\sqlite3\sqlite3.c 73531
According to the MS docs, __LINE__ is a decimal integer constant in VS
2013:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/b0084kay.aspx
but what you're seeing
On 04.03.2014 20:25, Eleytherios Stamatogiannakis wrote:
On 04/03/14 20:11, Alek Paunov wrote:
On 04.03.2014 15:05, Eleytherios Stamatogiannakis wrote:
On 03/03/14 03:01, Alek Paunov wrote:
It seems that the easiest optimization for this (very often) VT use
case
(bulk streaming) is SQLite
On 4/3/2014 11:33 μμ, Alek Paunov wrote:
On 04.03.2014 20:25, Eleytherios Stamatogiannakis wrote:
On 04/03/14 20:11, Alek Paunov wrote:
On 04.03.2014 15:05, Eleytherios Stamatogiannakis wrote:
On 03/03/14 03:01, Alek Paunov wrote:
It seems that the easiest optimization for this (very often)
Also, i want to note the pretty clever hack from Hick Gunter that
works by passing a proxy for the row (instead of the whole row's
values) to SQLite. This proxy gets expanded using the xColumn API by a
virtual table outside the whole query.
In this way a query using multiple VTs, only needs
It seems that the compilation errors i reported earlier
error C2099: initializer is not a constant ..\sqlite3\sqlite3.c 73531,
etc
only occured in debug mode, and, were caused by flag:
Program Database for Edit And Continue (/ZI)
after changing the flag to:
Program Database (/Zi)
everything
On 4 Mar 2014, at 8:05pm, Eduardo Morras emorr...@yahoo.es wrote:
The tables have 4 rows each one,
Hahahaha. Hah. That changes things.
You have something wrong. Either the database is corrupt (check it with a
PRAGMA or make another one) or your code is messed up somehow.
As a test, open
29 matches
Mail list logo
