This thread looks to be a little on the old side and therefore may no longer be relevant. Please see if there is a newer thread on the subject and ensure you're using the most recent build of any software if your question regards a particular product.
This thread has been locked and is no longer accepting new posts, if you have a question regarding this topic please email us at support@mindscape.co.nz
|
The latest LightSpeed version use System.Data.SQLite provider v1.0.74.0. The latest System.Data.SQLite provider (v1.0.80.0) brings few usefull changes, like eg. ability to clone database from file database to memory database (using backup). Is it possible to replace LighSpeed SQLite provider with the latest version ?? If not, Are You planning to use the latest System.Data.SQLite in further versions ?? |
|
|
Thanks for drawing our attention to this. The next nightly build will use 1.0.80. |
|
|
Given the shaky nature of many of these providers, I would prefer that Lightspeed maintain a more conservative approach to updating dependencies. Perhaps only as part of a formal release? If you identify a problem in testing, by all means move forward. But even with the MySQL and Postgres providers, there were certainly revisions you simply wouldn't want to let anywhere near your database. You can always bind to a later version using the local config file i.e., this lets you target the latest Amazon SDK:
|
|
|
On the contrary. Shipping provider updates as part of a nightly build helps to shake out any integration problems in advance of a major release -- if the update is shaky, we can rapidly revert it and wait for a more stable one. (That said I don't recall a case where we have shipped a bad provider update -- we are usually reasonably conservative in terms of integrating updates only once they have been out for a while and customers are asking for them!) |
|
|
If it's shaking out Lightspeed integration problems, sure, go for it. But I'd hope your internal tests would catch those sorts of problems and we don't need to eat the dogfood. My experience was that they do things like regress writing certain Unicode characters to the database for six months and nobody notices. If there's a Lightspeed 5 beta track, by all means include the latest stuff then. But there's a line between "I need a newer Lightspeed because they fixed an outright querying bug" and "I need a newer Lightspeed because they added this cool new feature" and it's getting a little blurry. |
|
|
Thank You for the update. It helps me solve th issue described in Migration using LightSpeed and SQLite stored in-memory |
|
|
Thank You for the update. It helps me solve th issue described in Migration using LightSpeed and SQLite stored in-memory |
|