On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 6:05 PM, Simon Slavin <slav...@bigfraud.org> wrote:
> On 19 Dec 2017, at 4:15pm, Dinu <dinumar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > 3) "Deleted" bit field - presumably the "soft delete" as you call it; > If you do try this, the 'bit' column should be declared as INTEGER and the > values stored should be 0 and 1. SQLite is extremely efficient at > storing/sorting these values. > "extremely efficient" is a bit exaggerated IMHO. More space efficient definitely, see serial types 8 and 8 in [1], so only the record's header section need to be consulted, w/o the need to decode the whole record or decode the varint [2], thus more cpu efficient too (since less to do), but the record's page still needs to be paged in/out on reads/writes, and that's like to dominate anyway. Just my guess though, no hard data to back that up. Perhaps Ryan will measure the difference he often does :) --DD [1] https://www.sqlite.org/fileformat.html#record_format [2] https://www.sqlite.org/fileformat2.html#varint _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
