Could the maintainer please configure the list manager to not send us this kind of messages? It is a litle boring we should have to know what old users e-mail was on the list that are invalid now.
Regards, ~Nuno Lucas P.S.- I think my english is a litle bad on this phrase but I couldn't find another way to say the same thing. = = = = = = This is a forward message = = = = = = = Original serder's name: Bouncer Original serder's address: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Your Mail has been bounced from the OutPost/1.800eMail Server >Because "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" is not a valid username > > >Original message, less any attachments, follows: >==================================================================== > >------------------------------------------------------------ >From: "Nuno Lucas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Re: [sqlite] SQLite performance with mid-size databases >Date: Wed16 Jun 2004 15:23:8 CST > > >This could be related with the grid handling code. >In another post I already talked about the "SELECT COUNT(*) ..." performance problem, >that can only be solved by tuning the code in the grid control itself. >If the code is generic, it's a strong possibility it isn't optimized for this, and >assumes a count of records taking not time at all. >Another strong possibility is the grid control using a SQLite wraper already slow by >nature. > >I am wondering if there is a possibility of being notified of new/deleted rows >without the use of triggers in simple way. What I'm thinking about is in generic >database browsers, that want to update their grids if another process changes the >database (and a viewer shouldn't create triggers in the database he is watching, only >if the user creates one). I know one can register hooks for auth access, but that >seems a bit too much and only related to the local process/thread. >Another use is for "server" applications, to be notified of changes in the database >from local clients (so he could invalidate his cache, etc.). > > >Regards, >~Nuno Lucas > > >P.S. - I'm very weak on SQL, but I think it isn't possible to create temp triggers. >Is this right? > > >=== On 2004-06-16, Randall Fox wrote === >>On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 23:04:04 -0500, you wrote: >> >>> Hi. We are using SQLite to store and retrieve data rows where each >>>row is roughly 2K total in size and in a table of 15 columns. The total >>>size of the database ranges from 100-300 MB. >>> >>> The problem we are seeing is that query and insert performance is >>>unusually bad and scales up linearly with database size. Compared to MS >>>Access, the query times are several times slower. Frankly I was a bit >>>shocked at this considering that most people seem to think the >>>performance is good. However, I don't see anything that we are doing >>>wrong...we query the rows we want only by rowid. I'm very puzzled that >>>this hasn't come up a lot in my searches of the mailing list, but >>>perhaps the slower query times aren't a concern for many of the >>>applications using SQLite. >>> >>> Empirically speaking, we display our data in a scrolling 2 >>>dimensional grid format. With MS access, this grid responds >>>instantaneously when moving through the grid. With SQLite, there is >>>very noticable stalling and lag and the disk i/o is higher than MS >>>Access by roughly a factor of 10. >>> >>> I suppose I am looking to see if anyone is seeing the same results >>>that I am seeing, and wondering if this is known and expected to be the >>>case. The speed results on the website seem way off to me or must be so >>>skewed towards a small dataset that they do not apply in a real world >>>scenario. I would also like to state that I am very impressed with the >>>simplicity of SQLite, which is rare to find these days. It was very >>>easy to get up and running. I'm just having trouble getting past the >>>performance issues. Any explanation would be helpful. >>> >>>Richard Kuo >> >> >>How do you fill in the grid control? Is it storing the data, or do >>you provide the data when requested? (owner data..) You may need to >>implement some caching if it isn't implemented already, I know some >>controls have this set up in them, and it could be that either access >>is taking advantage of this, or is caching it from w/in the DB >>itself.. >> >>Also, did you implement a integer primary key, and use indexing? >> >>Randall Fox --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
