0

I got the following problem and no idea on how to solve it. I am using SqlJet to access and manage a small Sqlite DB. It's amazing the simplicity of this library! But now, I have to execute a complex query which cannot be expressed using the methods provided by the library. On the website, they say

SQLJet does not support SQL queries; there is an API to work with the database on a lower level

And I was wondering, anybody of you know what is this lower level API to execute SQL queries?

user1384636
  • 481
  • 6
  • 17

1 Answers1

0

As far as I can tell from my research, there is no support for arbitrary SQL queries in SQLJet. I first thought it was a sqlite wrapper, which it isn't, so there is also no way to use JDBC. Other than the lookup rows by name and index stuff, the "lower level" API they are talking about on their page, seems just to be direct access to the internal DB representation, as mentioned in this post.

From a quick glance at the JavaDoc and sources, it might be the SqlJetDb.getSchema() and getTable() methods. There is no proper API documentation or Tutorials, there is even a complaint about this in the issue tracker.

Maybe you can describe what you want to do. Either there is a way to do it though the limited interface SQLJet offers, or I'm afraid I can't help. Its also good idea to contact the developers directly, as it seems there is not much information to be found elsewhere.

Benjamin Maurer
  • 3,602
  • 5
  • 28
  • 49
  • The usage of SqlJet is mandatory in the project, I can't use the standard interface. I need to pass this query via SQLjet. I was wondering if "there is an API to work" means that THEY provide an API for the lower-level or they mean "use the standard interface". – user1384636 Jan 07 '13 at 13:07
  • I have edited my answer, bc. this comment field is too small. Again, maybe you can describe what you want to do and we can find a way to do it without proper SQL queries. – Benjamin Maurer Jan 07 '13 at 14:10
  • I spoke with the project manager, and she decided to move for a small refactor. Thank you anyway – user1384636 Jan 07 '13 at 15:22