3 ms·

While I sympathize with you, in both links the maintainer said it had been fixed. Maybe you ought to report a new bug? I didn't see any evidence regarding "main

• summarity 3y ago
  No, you are correct, it's just hard to debug something and produce a minimal case when the only change is "performance bad". This is mostly a hint to people that may run into similar issues while upgrading. And my reference concerned this comment (which I may have misunderstood, sorry if that's the case): > It is not planned for any patch releases because it is only a performance issue and not a malfunction.
  • TheRealPomax 3y ago
    patch releases are the third number (e.g. the "1" in "3.43.1"). The comment says nothing about it not qualifying as work to be done for a minor release (e.g. the "43" in "3.43"). If the bug is closed, and you still see it happening, file a new bug with a reproducible example so that the maintainers know it's (still) happening. And if that example means setting up a small dedicate repo with enough data to show the problem off, that's probably worth doing.
  • nextaccountic 3y ago
    > No, you are correct, it's just hard to debug something and produce a minimal case when the only change is "performance bad". Well the sqlite devs should be aware of your specific test case (the specific query that is still 3 orders of magnitude slower). Are they? After this the ball is with them