On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Ward Willats <sqlite-us...@wardco.com>wrote:
> Hello Experts: > > We are compiling our own amalgamation into our multi-threaded iOS app. > > Just saw a busy error where one thread is in sqlite doing an fsync() > (unix_sync(), full_fsync()) and the the thread that gets the error is > trying to start a transaction. > > So it looks like fsync() is taking more than the 5 second timeout I've set. > > What do you think? Should I make the timeout longer, or #define > SQLITE_NO_SYNC, or? > Do not compile with SQLITE_NO_SYNC. If you want to turn of fsync(), using "PRAGMA synchronous=OFF". But even doing that is not recommended, since if you turn of fsync() and you loss power in the middle of writing a transaction, your database will likely go corrupt. SQLite uses fsync() like a write-barrier primitive that ensures that all writes that occur prior to the fsync complete before any writes that occur afterwards. If writes occur out-of-order, and some of the earlier writes never occur, then the database file can go corrupt. Hence, it is best to leave fsync() turned on. > > Thanks, as always, > > -- Ward > > _______________________________________________ > sqlite-users mailing list > sqlite-users@sqlite.org > http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users > -- D. Richard Hipp d...@sqlite.org _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
