Hi Simon Thank you for your reply.
> > Probably worth us knowing whether you've read the 'Performance > Considerations' section of > > <http://www.sqlite.org/wal.html> > Yes, I have read that, along with all the threads/posts I could find from the Internet. The thing that I cannot fully understand is how can FULL (2) guarantee durability, but NORMAL (1) cannot. Before making an attempt to look into the code, I just wanted to see if anyone can help provide some explanation. > before anyone gives an in-depth answer. The basic difference between the two > settings is that FULL (2) synchronises far more frequently than NORMAL (1), > meaning that in the even of power loss, fewer transactions will be lost. > Though if your OS and hardware does perform as documented then neither mode > will actually lose data or cause database corruption. Durability means a transaction cannot be lost, and I know FULL (1) will provide that. The question is why NORMAL (1) cannot provide the same. I am using EXT3 with barrier=1 and write-cache disabled from the HDD, as far as I know this is as good as it gets for making the system reliable. So, in this case, will the NORMAL (1) actually cause data loss on power loss? I already know that corruption will not happen, I am just interested in the "losing transactions" or "sacrifice durability" as suggested in various threads/posts I have read. Regards Keith > > Simon. > _______________________________________________ > 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
