Yes, I expect the database to be small enough. It is the loading a :memory: database from and storing to memory blocks that still eludes me. I will take a look at the backup link.
Thanks! On 9 February 2011 13:48, Simon Slavin <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 9 Feb 2011, at 10:14am, Bastian Clarenbach wrote: > > > My environment does not have direct file access, instead I can only > request > > files and get a memblock returned that contains the entire file. I am > trying > > to figure out how to do one, preferably both, of the following scenarios. > > > > 1. I want to create a database 'offline' and then load and use that db as > a > > static resource (no inserts or other changes) > > 2. I want to create a database in memory, store that into a memory block > and > > then be able to restore it like in 1 > > The biggest question with this is whether you expect your entire database > file to be small enough that you would want to hold it in memory all that > the same time. SQLite handles databases in memory just fine: address the > filename as ':memory:'. See > > http://www.sqlite.org/inmemorydb.html > > You can delve into the depths of SQLite and mess with the file system > routines. But a more appropriate way to do this might be to use the backup > API: > > http://www.sqlite.org/backup.html > > It might be possible to use this to copy your database between the memblock > and memory or a local file. > > Simon. > _______________________________________________ > 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
