Yes I use SQLite for replicating a main oracle database. Occasionally (and I mean occasionally) a schema change in Oracle needs to be propagated to the SQLite database. So this situation does arise for me.
-----Original Message----- From: Rob Lohman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 03 November 2005 17:11 To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org Subject: Re: [sqlite] Request for comment: Proposed SQLite API changes >> Another proposal: Suppose that when creating an sqlite3_stmt using >> sqlite3_prepare, the original SQL text was stored in the >> sqlite3_stmt. Then when a schema change occurred, the statement was >> automatically recompiled and rebound. There would no more >> SQLITE_SCHEMA errors. But sqlite3_stmts would use a little more >> memory. And sqlite3_step might take a little longer to initialize >> sometimes if it found it needed to rerun the parser. >> >> What about this change? Is it a worth-while tradeoff? > > I'm a big fan of this change. We do quite a lot of bookkeeping in our > own code to do exactly the same thing at the moment. It would make me > very happy to delete that code. This is not directly a question for you, Eric, but does anyone actually have schema changes on a working database? I've never seen any schema changes on my databases except for a new version, bugfixes etc. Does anyone runs code that actually changes the schema of your database as the normal process in an application? If so, for what reason? Rob
