2011/11/2 Mr. Puneet Kishor <punk.k...@gmail.com> > > ahh, so you *are* getting expected behavior, just not what *you* expected. > Did you have a different number in mind instead of a factor of 300? And, if > so, why?
To read an (un-cached) 150mb file from disk, doesn't take 30 seconds. And SQLite shouldn't have to read the whole file (because of the INDEX), only the relevant rows in the INDEX, so theoreticly it should even be faster than reading the whole file. Because Windows has a aggresive caching technique (it reads much larger blocks from disk, even if you request only 10 bytes from the file), I'm not expecting SQLite to be faster than reading the whole file, but that it's so much slower just surprises me. Maybe there is a very simple explanation, I just can't think of any. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
