On Fri, Aug 04, 2017 at 07:05:06PM +0000, Peter Da Silva wrote: > Step 2 seems rather expensive, even if you’re filtering out dead blocks in > the process.
It's no more expensive than WAL checkpointing is today. You could always do what LMDB does to reuse free blocks in a DB and avoid having to checkpoint-and-rename-into-place, but that greatly complicates locking because readers have to lock the transaction that they are reading at. Nico -- _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
