Thank you very much to all who replied to me. I misunderstood the vacuum function. I had problems with my output routine because of the empty spaces. I thought to solve the problem that way. I have just solved the problem by using another output routine. Regards Daniel
> > I have deleted some objects in my database. Now I have objects at id > > (INTEGER PRIMARY KEY) =1,3,4,5,7,8,9,16,17,20.... . > > id=2,6,10,.. are empty. I want to defrag the database so that I have > objects > > continuously at id=1,2,3,4,5,6,7,... > > The first question I'd have to ask is why you want to do that? If those > primary keys are referred to by foreign keys in child tables, you'd have to > change all those values as well. With a large number of child tables, this > seems like more work than it's work. Any mistakes and you destroy your > database's referential integrity. > > > Is the vacuum function not the right function? > > I don't believe so. I think your only recourse is to define another table > with the same structure, then select all the records from the old one into > the new one, delete the old one, then do the same back again to the old > name. Unless there's some pragma or something that allows one to rename a > table. >
