Sharma, Gaurav wrote: > Please clear my one more doubt. Is it true that either using the > SQLITE_THREADSAFE=1 as compile time flag or using > SQLITE_OPEN_FULLMUTEX with sqlite3_open_v2 are same thing. Both can > be used interchangeably. Correct me if I am wrong.
Once you compile with SQLITE_THREADSAFE=0, all threading and mutex related code is removed at compile time, and SQLite can only be used in single-threaded mode. If you compile with SQLITE_THREADSAFE=1 or 2, you can then switch between multi-threaded and serialized mode at run time, by specifying SQLITE_OPEN_NOMUTEX or SQLITE_OPEN_FULLMUTEX flags to sqlite3_open_v2. SQLITE_THREADSAFE determines the default setting when neither flag is specified. You can also change the default at run-time with sqlite3_config (but again, once you compile with SQLITE_THREADSAFE=0, there's no way to switch to any of the two thread-safe modes). See http://www.sqlite.org/threadsafe.html > Secondly, Is it possible by any mean that for shared connection > amongst thread, the insert on one thread does not become part of the > transaction on other thread. No. A transaction is a property of a connection, not that of a thread. You'd have to use separate connections, perhaps in shared-cache mode: http://www.sqlite.org/sharedcache.html > And one last thing just to confirm that it is not at all possible to > open different in memory db connection from different threads? Every time you open a connection to :memory:, a new in-memory db is created. So yes, it's possible to open multiple connections to in-memory databases (whether from multiple threads or otherwise) - but not to the same in-memory database. Igor Tandetnik _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
