> Le 31 mai 2018 à 12:31, x <[email protected]> a écrit :
>
> std::cout << "Ascending" << std::endl;
> for (int i=0; sqlite3_step(asc)==SQLITE_ROW; i++)
> if (i%Gap==0) std::cout << FreeMBs() << std::endl;
> std::cout << FreeMBs() << std::endl;
>
> std::cout << std::endl << "Descending" << std::endl;
> for (int i=0; sqlite3_step(desc)==SQLITE_ROW; i++)
> if (i%Gap==0) std::cout << FreeMBs() << std::endl;
> std::cout << FreeMBs() << std::endl;
Following up on my previous answer, I'd suggest to put the process to sleep for
let's say at least a good full minute between the first loop and the second one
and see how it impacts the FreeMBs reporting during the second loop.
You might even put the one minute sleep right after the very first step of the
second loop has run.
for (int i=0; sqlite3_step(desc)==SQLITE_ROW; i++)
{
if (i == 0) Sleep(60000);
if (i%Gap==0) std::cout << FreeMBs() << std::endl;
}
You get the idea.
--
Best Regards, Meilleures salutations, Met vriendelijke groeten,
Olivier Mascia
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
