{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/square/sqlbrite/issues/110","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/square/sqlbrite","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/square/sqlbrite/issues/110/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/square/sqlbrite/issues/110/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/square/sqlbrite/issues/110/events","html_url":"https://github.com/square/sqlbrite/issues/110","id":155448049,"number":110,"title":"WAL mode","user":{"login":"mblcdr","id":3671190,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/3671190?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/mblcdr","html_url":"https://github.com/mblcdr","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mblcdr/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mblcdr/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mblcdr/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mblcdr/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mblcdr/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mblcdr/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mblcdr/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mblcdr/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/mblcdr/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/square/sqlbrite/labels/enhancement","name":"enhancement","color":"84b6eb"}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":9,"created_at":"2016-05-18T08:50:42Z","updated_at":"2016-07-10T18:26:32Z","closed_at":null,"body":"I see that sqlbrite opens transaction using ```beginTransactionWithListener()``` which as you may know starts the transaction in EXCLUSIVE mode.\r\nI was wondering why you don't use ```beginTransactionWithListenerNonExclusive()``` which makes it possible for read operations to be performed concurrently alongside a write."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/square/sqlbrite/issues/comments/231603306","html_url":"https://github.com/square/sqlbrite/issues/110#issuecomment-231603306","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/square/sqlbrite/issues/110","id":231603306,"user":{"login":"JakeWharton","id":66577,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/66577?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/JakeWharton","html_url":"https://github.com/JakeWharton","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/JakeWharton/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/JakeWharton/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/JakeWharton/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/JakeWharton/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/JakeWharton/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/JakeWharton/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/JakeWharton/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/JakeWharton/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/JakeWharton/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2016-07-10T18:26:32Z","updated_at":"2016-07-10T18:26:32Z","body":"> However I'm not sure if we should put aside the convinience and simplicity of using an in-memory db for a few tests.\r\n\r\nI don't think it's that big of deal. I was just worried it would slow down the tests by 10x or something. Basically 100% of consumers will be using the library with a file-backed DB anyway so it just puts us closer to real usage."}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"JakeWharton"}}