> Le 6 août 2019 à 15:34, David Raymond <david.raym...@tomtom.com> a écrit : > >> "But you do need WAL to achieve multiple readers concurrency..." > > Nope, you can have concurrent readers with rollback journal mode. You just > can't have anyone writing while they're all reading. > > (Or I may just be misunderstanding what you meant)
No David, you are perfectly right. It just is that I was too concise in expressing my thoughts. In my book, short of very specific specialized needs, the prospect of some process involving multiple concurrent readers, which tend to imply that there are very often one or many readers at any one time, without much place for a writer to intervene, if only on occasion, without disrupting the flow of readers, is not very welcome. That's why SQLite makes sense for me (my needs), albeit in WAL mode only. I'm so bathed in WAL all day long, that I tend to forget the details when not using WAL. You did well to correct my assertion which without context, is misleading, another word for wrong. Thanks. :) — Best Regards, Meilleures salutations, Met vriendelijke groeten, Mit besten Grüßen, Olivier Mascia _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
