Eugene Wee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > The new file format stores boolean values (the integers 0 and 1)
> > more efficiently - requiring only 1 bytes of disk space instead of
> > 2.  There are no other changes.
> > 
> > 
> > Let me reemphasize that the new file format has caused so much
> > grief that I will likely revert to the older format with 3.4.0.
> > That is to say, databases created by 3.4.0 will be readable by
> > 3.2.8.  3.4.0 will be able to read and write both the old and the
> > new formats, of course.  And you will still be able to use the new
> > format using a pragma or a compile-time option.  It just won't be
> > the default any more.
> > 
> > I have learned my lesson.  Do not enhance the file format without
> > a very good reason.  Saving one byte of space when storing booleans
> > is not a sufficiently good reason...
> 
> I think that reverting back is not the solution. At the moment, 
> the news about the change in file format is several entries down 
> the news and changes list. People may also not be aware that newer 
> SQLite versions are backwards compatible but not forwards compatible.
> If the documentation was clearer on the file format, its changes 
> and compatibility, an enhancement of the file format may not 
> cause so much confusion.
> 

You know what - the new file format supports an additional feature
that I completely forgot about: descending indices.  So I suppose
it was worth going to the new format after all.  I put in the
change back in December of last year and had completely forgotten
about the descending index addition.  But it is coming back to
me now.  I added descending indices and said to myself, as long 
as I am having to change the file format, I might as well enhance
the boolean value representation too.  But then I completely forgot
about the descending index change.  Silly me....

> 
> P.S.: any news on when 3.4.0 will be out? :D
> 

I still have not made a final decision on whether it will be
3.3.7 or 3.4.0.  There is no incompatibility so 3.3.7 would
technically be correct.  But there are a lot of enhancements
so I was thinking of going to 3.4.0 just to emphasize the 
magnitude of the change.

I'm thinking end of July or early August.



Reply via email to