Yeah if I put BEGIN IMMEDIATE in thread1 as well, then it works, but as you say I don't see why I need to do this. Perhaps the implicit transaction which is created in my 1-line INSERT statement isn't an immediate transaction??
Seems like there should be a flag or pragma or something to force all transactions to be immediate. -Dave On 3/13/06, Igor Tandetnik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Dave Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Igor - ok I tried this, and now I am getting SQLITE_BUSY returned > > when I try > > to sqlite3_exec my "BEGIN IMMEDIATE" statement. So I then put that > > in a > > do-while( rc == SQLITE_BUSY) loop, and now my first thread is getting > > SQLITE_BUSY returned when it tries to execute the 1-line INSERT > > statement > > (without transaction). > > It should run the busy handler in this situation as far as I can tell - > I have no idea why it might not. > > Does anything change if you use BEGIN IMMEDIATE for DB1 too? > > Note that when you don't explicitly start a transaction, one is started > for you anyway as soon as you try to execute a statement, and is > automatically committed when the statement completes. So it is incorrect > to way that you run a statement without transaction. > > Igor Tandetnik > >
