Using SQLite 3.8.7.1. Here <http://www.sqlabs.com/blog/2010/12/sqlite-and-unique-rowid-something-you-really-need-to-know/> and elsewhere <https://stackoverflow.com/questions/31767460/deleting-from-a-contentprovider#> is mentioned that the official SQLite documentation includes the line
Rowids can change at any time and without notice. If you need to depend on > your rowid, make it an INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, then it is guaranteed not to > change However, I haven't been able to find that in the official documentation. I wonder whether such an assertion is true. Any column declared as 'INTEGER PRIMARY KEY' is said to be an alias for the internal 'rowid' column, and this <http://www.sqlabs.com/blog/2010/12/sqlite-and-unique-rowid-something-you-really-need-to-know/> proves that 'rowid' can change after a 'vacuum' statement is issued. Merely replaying the steps in the linked post, but declaring an additional column as 'INTEGER PRIMARY KEY' shows that even after 'vacuum' both the rowid and the declared primary key remain unchanged. My main question is: is an 'INTEGER PRIMARY KEY' column guaranteed not to change, except as a consequence of ordinary UPDATE statements? (And in particular, not as a consequence of a 'vacuum' statement.) I'd also thank further explanation as to why the 'vacuum' statement doesn't change 'rowid's when an explicit 'INTEGER PRIMARY KEY' is declared. Thanks in advance.
