Thanks, Pavel, for answering my questions!
>> I am also thinking that I may want to make use of the sqlite_unlock_notify() >> call to ensure that if I try to write to the database and it fails to get a >> lock, it will pend until it is available. However, I thought that a query >> would pend until it gets a lock anyway. Is that not the case? >sqlite3_unlock_notify() works only with shared-cache mode within one >process. It doesn't work in inter-process locking. And by default >query won't be pending until locking is possible. If you use function >sqlite3_busy_timeout() you can obtain behavior close to what you want. So, then what is the best way to make a query from one process pend until the database is available? For example, let's say I have two processes that connect to the same database file. One process wants to read from the database, but the other process is in the middle of a write. Does the first process pend on the read or not? If it does not, what does it return? Is it a successful read? What about the reverse case when the first process wants to write but the second process is reading? Is this what I would use sqlite3_busy_timeout() for? Thanks for the help! Jonathan _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
