On Feb 8, 2008, at 6:10 AM, Jason Tudor wrote: > Thanks for the quick feedback, you all have good points. The data > transfer > example that Sam provided is the most compelling to me.
Another reason is that a transaction that writes to more than one attached database is still an atomic operation (either all the changes will succeed or none of them). You can't do that with two separate database handles. Dan. > I was initially thinking that I could attach every database I had > with the > same schema and execute queries without specifying database names. > It's > good to know the limitations and uses. > > Thanks again > TUD > > > On Feb 7, 2008 2:39 PM, Nicolas Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> Given the restrictions on views and triggers (they cannot make >> reference >> to tables from more than one database) I'd say "stay away from ATTACH >> where possible" -- don't create new uses of it without good reason. >> _______________________________________________ >> sqlite-users mailing list >> sqlite-users@sqlite.org >> http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users >> > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users@sqlite.org > http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
