> While I'm not a SQLite developer, I have to say I think you're going > down the wrong path. Are you sure the WAL index is your bottleneck? > I think it is unlikely.
I think you are right, and I stooped working on this issue. > From your previous descriptions of your application, you might be better > off rethinking how big you make your batches, and committing more often > than you currently do, and using the default checkpoint mechanism in a > single thread. With smaller batches, checkpointing will take less time, > so you'll see less jitter when inserting data. > > Or, have smaller batches with a background checkpointing thread. > > As it is at the moment, your batches sound like they're too big, > and the checkpoint thread can never hope to catch up, hence your > huge checkpoint file. > > In order to help further, you'd need to specify more details > of the event source, such as how big and how often data is > coming in. > I don't want to reduce transaction size, and I don't want to run checkpoint in the main thread. See the reason for it here: http://www.mail-archive.com/sqlite-users@sqlite.org/msg57382.html I would love to continue this discussion over there. Yoni. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
