If you renamed file1.db to file1.bak, opened file1.bak, vacuum into file1.db, close file1.bak, you have a backup pre-vacuum (just in case...) and 'streamlines' the process some-what. Obviously, you'd have to rename the file back again if the vacuum failed (out of disk space, etc)
Just a thought,,,, Chris On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 4:22 PM David Raymond <david.raym...@tomtom.com> wrote: > So to make sure I'm understanding it ok, with the new vacuum into command, > if I'm the only user of a file, then the sequence... > > open file1 > vacuum into file2 > close file1 > delete file1 > rename file2 to file1 > > ...is going to be potentially more than twice as fast as the old... > > open file1 > vacuum > > ...as it saves the whole re-write of the original file, along with all the > rollback journal or wal writes that entails. Correct? > > (With of course the whole "make sure it actually finished and didn't just > die" caveats before doing the delete and rename) > _______________________________________________ > 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
