Comment 4 for bug 897469
Revision history for this message
| Timo Kluck (tkluck) wrote Re: [Bug 897469] Re: Simple Scan crashes result in preventable data loss | #4 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
0e1f616
(Get the code!)
> 1- how does sqlite handle crashing? this patch will not improve the
> situation if one ends up with a corrupted sqlite database... does it do
> transactions or do you have something like fsync to force writeout ...
According to [1], Sqlite is extremely reliable in this regard. "All
changes within a single transaction in SQLite either occur completely
or not at all, even if the act of writing the change out to the disk
is interrupted by a program crash, an operating system crash, or a
power failure."
> 2- as far as i can tell the feature request from (amongst other reports)
> Bug #483392 -- namely: resuming a previous session -- could be trivially
> solved with the same underlying code if there was an option to
> gracefully exit simple-scan while leaving behind the sqlite-entry that
> will tigger "recovery" on the next startup. could you look into adding
> this?
You're right, this would be trivial. It just needs UI design. It
possibly makes sense to just have this as the default behaviour,
because it is easy enough to click the file -> new button. Or make it
default behaviour in case of unsaved changes.
[1] http://