On 4/19/15, Joe Pasquariello <joep at fenway.com> wrote: > Some users of my application have their servers in remote locations that > lose power. They have UPS backup, but the battery runs down and the > computers will suddenly stop. When power returns and the application > starts, the SQLITE database is sometimes corrupt. The vast majority of > writes to the database are to a table that could be TEMPORARY, but is > currently not. If that table was created as TEMPORARY, and it was in > MEMORY, as opposed to FILE, would the likelihood of corruption on > restart be reduced?
Yes. Corruption is only possible if power is lost in the middle of a COMMIT and either you have PRAGMA synchronous=off, or your OS/hardware combination is not doing real fsync()s when requested. So if you dramatically reduce the number of COMMITs you also reduce the number of windows of vulnerability. > If not, is there another change (schema or > otherwise) that would help? > Using WAL mode will help, if that is possible. Your phrase "remote servers" is not exactly clear to me? Are they using a network filesystem? -- D. Richard Hipp drh at sqlite.org
