Thank you, Roger, for your piece of advice. I will consider it, but it will be a great deal to rework.
Patrik On 02/26/2012 11:41 PM, Roger Binns wrote: > On 26/02/12 12:40, Patrik Nilsson wrote: >> Yes. My program starts two thread, the main one and a worker. There >> are mutexes so only one at a time can the sqlite interface. > > In previous postings to the mailing list when people do things like this, > I believe that it turning out to be a threading bug in their program is > 100%. The onus will be on you to prove that you do not have a threading bug. > > Some examples. Unless you call sqlite3_db_mutex you cannot safely get the > error string. Unless you keep sqlite3_stmt per thread you can have memory > changed underneath you. Unless you use SQLITE_TRANSIENT, the memory that > gets used may not be what you intended (your symptoms correlate with this > BTW). > > Even if you write perfect thread safe and correct code in 999 places in > your code, getting the thousandth one slightly wrong is enough to cause > problems. > > By far the safest thing to do is to either only do SQLite activity in one > thread, or to give each thread its own sqlite3 connection. > > 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
