On 3 Jan 2015, at 4:41am, Keith Medcalf <kmedc...@dessus.com> wrote:
> I do not believe that there is a way to specify "COMMIT BUT MAINTAIN THE > SHARED LOCK", (that is, to commit the changes only and un-escalate the lock > back to a shared lock) which would be required in order for the loop > semantics posited by the OP to work correctly. If it were possible to "COMMIT BUT MAINTAIN THE SHARED LOCK" then a thread could hog the database, never letting other threads/processes do their work. So I hope it's not possible to do it. Simon. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
