You still seem to have missed the point that several have made. There are lots of people still using 32bit Windows. They cannot use a 64bit SQLite3.exe. Therefore the 32bit one has to stay. The 32bit one will work on a 64bit OS, with restrictions. The number of people who hit those restrictions is quite small. You are the only person I can remember posting about hitting one. Most that do can build their own 64bit exe.
So I guess currently the team have decided it isn't worth the effort to provide both exes to support those few people. Maybe this will change if the number increase. Regards Andy -----Original Message----- From: sqlite-users [mailto:sqlite-users-boun...@mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Rousselot, Richard A Sent: Wed 10 August 2016 15:43 To: SQLite mailing list Subject: Re: [sqlite] 64-bit SQLite3.exe First of all thanks for the discussion. Special thanks out to DD. ;) I will just summarize my main view. * CTEs can easily exceed memory limits of the 32-bit SQLite3.exe. So I have a valid need and am not on a crusade to kill 32-bits. Telling me that other people don't have my problems is irrelevant, to me. :) Response to all other banter; in good humor. * The rest of the arguments about Microsoft currently shipping software that is 32-bit, is a red herring. I bet if you tried hard enough, you could find code from Windows 3.1 in Windows 10. That wasn’t a properly thought out design decision. That is laziness and frugality (possibly stupidity) on Microsoft's part. I once read that MS would hire the developer of ReactOS so they could explain how their own operating system works. (I digress) * If I did figure out how to build the 64-bit executable, I guarantee, that it would be a catastrophe. I can't even figure out how to post on Nabble for freaks sake. ;) * I can still buy a VW bug designed in the 30s; does that mean that all new engines developed should have to fit in the back of that thing? * I acquiesce on all other points, I am weary. Finally, I just want to say I really appreciate the work that is put in to SQLite. It is one of many tools I use on a day to day basis but it is the only one where I actively watch the discussions on a mailing list. The regulars here are thoughtful, intelligent and infinitely patient. I learn new things every day watching you guys and for that I thank you. Richard -----Original Message----- From: sqlite-users [mailto:sqlite-users-boun...@mailinglists.sqlite.org] On Behalf Of Keith Medcalf Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2016 7:03 AM To: SQLite mailing list Subject: Re: [sqlite] 64-bit SQLite3.exe > Even on a 64-bit processor, there’s usually no reason to run 64-bit > Windows unless you have more than 4 GB of RAM, a threshold we didn’t > pass very long ago. Yes, please remember to keep the "addressable memory limits" linkage to "processor bitted-ness" is a Microsoft Only phenomenon. You do NOT need 64-bit processors or 64-bit Operating systems to be able to address more than 4 GB of physical RAM. In fact that there are 32-bit versions of Windows (NT 3.5, 4.0, 2000, XP, 2003 etc) which have been compiled without this artificially imposed limitation. You pay more for "properly written and compiled" software however because, well, it is easy to do stupid things and impose stupid limits for no reason and you need higher wattage (therefore more expensive people) if you want software that is not bounded by a crapload of inane if not brain-dead) design decisions. It is also quite profitable to claim that your prior incompetencies were to blame on "something else" and if everyone would just spend a boatload of money and replace all the defective crap we sold them with a new boatload of defective crap (every six months), a very few of the deliberately imposed limitations will be removed (plus we make yet another boatload of money by ripping off the customer). > Or maybe you’d like to look to a less legacy-bound company? Say, > Google, who ships Chrome still built as 32-bit, originally for > compatibility with 32-bit NSAPI plugins. Since they dropped that, I > can only guess why they’re still building 32-bit binaries, and that > guess is that with the tab-per-process isolation, no single tab needs more > than 4 GB of VM space. Or they are using defective compilers (primary supplier in that field is Microsoft) that cannot switch memory models without re-writing the code. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users This communication is the property of CenturyLink and may contain confidential or privileged information. Unauthorized use of this communication is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the communication and any attachments. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered safely by Mimecast. For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
