On 04/04/2018 09:01 PM, Pavel Cernohorsky wrote:
Hello, does anybody know if there is some possibility to not have WAL
file as a normal file on the disk, but only in memory? I understand
that all the modifications to the database would get lost in case of
the application / OS crash, but for my application, I only need the
level of durability based on checkpointing. I just need to guarantee
that all the data are properly written to the main database and
synchronized to disk when manual (or even automatic) WAL checkpoint is
called, but I do not care if I loose data in between the checkpoints.
Of course database should never get corrupted.
If your app or the OS crashes halfway through a checkpoint and this
means that the WAL file is lost, the database is likely to be corrupted.
Is that a problem?
Dan.
My goal is to limit the number of IOps being performed to the disk.
Currently I use "PRAGMA synchronous = 1" and there is only one process
manipulating the database (multiple reader threads, only one writer
thread at one moment in time). Or if it is not possible to have WAL in
memory only, is there something like “PRAGMA wal_synchronous =
none_and_delete_wal_if_corrupted”?
Thanks for suggestions, kind regards,
Pavel
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
