> On Mar 10, 2017, at 3:32 PM, Simon Slavin <slav...@bigfraud.org> wrote: > > Two different patterns of use. One is that the different threads/processes > usually care about different rows (maybe in different tables). In that case, > shared cache is of very little benefit. The other is when different > threads/processes usually update the same parts of the files. In that case > sharing cache can provide a great improvement in throughput.
This is the latter case — the connections would be in a pool for threads to use. So each connection will be making a random subset of the queries. (My understanding is that the SQLite package for .NET already works this way, though I haven’t looked at it myself.) —Jens _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
