On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 10:25:49PM -0400, Andrew Cunningham scratched on the
wall:
> "I have doubts that you will be able to get SQLite to work on anything
> less than a 32-bit processor.
> D. Richard Hipp"
> I was under the impression as long as the processor had enough room to
> hold the program (and RAM) it would work.
Yeah, but you have to compile it first...
> The difference I would have
> expected would simply be speed of execution, but eventually getting
> there. With simple inserts/queries and the speed of sqlite, I thought
> it should be okay.
I suspect the issue has to do with 64-bit integer support. SQLite does
a lot with native 64-bit integer values (e.g. "unsigned long long int").
Most 32-bit processors have instructions that can deal with 64 bit
values as single, whole values, even if they require a lot of
slight-of-hand behind the scenes. Even if the processor doesn't have
explicit instructions, the compiler can often fake it by using the
overflow bits and a lot of byte shuffling.
I suppose it would be possible to play the same games with a 16 bit
(or even 8) processor, but I'm guessing the compilers for most of
these smaller chips don't support long long ints. Even if they do,
it is going to be pretty slow and inflate the code side.
-j
--
Jay A. Kreibich < J A Y @ K R E I B I.C H >
"'People who live in bamboo houses should not throw pandas.' Jesus said that."
- "The Ninja", www.AskANinja.com, "Special Delivery 10: Pop!Tech 2006"
_______________________________________________
sqlite-users mailing list
sqlite-users@sqlite.org
http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
