[ncruces]

That only catches changes made by the database connection being "hooked."

This has a thread running in the background trying to catch changes made by other connections, potentially (I'm not sure here, but I suspect as much) in different processes that are modifying the same database.

[billywhizz]

good point. but ime and as seems to be widely understood writing from multiple connections is a bit of a minefield in SQLite. and afaik it still would be possible to have a hook on all connections you expect to be writing?

[duped]

That wouldn't work across processes. And if you only care about in-process queuing then you might find it easier/faster to use another kind of storage or roll your own WAL.

[billywhizz]

i did a quick benchmark on this with a single db connection updating user_version in a tight loop with the wal_hook callback enabled.

on my crappy old i5 with the db file on /dev/shm it can do ~150k writes a second with the wal_hook callback called on every write. and this is using JS bindings to C++ so has some unnecessary overhead.