> Marcus Grimm wrote: >> I skipped to use the busy handler and the busy timeout and do >> the handling by my selve. typically like: > > Are you aware that your code is very similar to the default SQLite busy > handler if you set a busy timeout? I'd argue that the one shipped with > SQLite is better since it was written by the same people who wrote > SQLite :-)
Yes, it should do the same, I guess... ;) When I started with sqlite I had some troubles since I was not sure if the busy handler also deals with LOCKED state, at that time I did get that state and thus I just did all my selve. Today I would most likely try with the busy handler, but I'm happy now as it is. Anyway, you are right... but my version works now perfect, and sqlite so far has been proven to be able to work very well even under heavy load with multible connections open. Marcus > > Roger > _______________________________________________ > 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
