How much slower is the index than your pre-populated table? If you're really comparing apples to apples it would be good to know how big the different is.
If you post your schema and queries you'll probably get better advice. At that this I'm just guessing. -T On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 5:43 AM, Andrew Gatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thomas Briggs wrote: >> Ultimately it'll depend on your schema and the query you're >> running, but you're probably better off creating an index that covers >> the SELECT query you're executing. That should make the query fast >> and save you the hassle of writing and maintaining triggers. >> >> The later post about transactions probably won't help given that >> you're asking about SELECTs rather than INSERTs/UPDATEs. >> >> -T >> >> > Thanks for the reply, i already have an index in place and it does > improve matters significantly. However the performance is still much > slower than a pre compiled table - which of course makes sense. I did > think the CREATE TEMP VIEW would cache the result and therefore provide > exactly what i was looking for, but according to my speed tests this > isn't the case. I think i am on the right lines by creating a temporary > table with the precompiled results for maximum read out speed. > > Andrew > > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users > _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list [email protected] http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
