Redpill me on SQLite

Redpill me on SQLite
What are the advantages / disadvantages over a server based database? Why would you bother using networking to interact with your database when you could just do it locally?

Attached: SQLite370.svg.png (1200x569, 44K)

Other urls found in this thread:

sqlite.org/whentouse.html
pgcon.org/2014/schedule/events/736.en.html
sqlite.org/limits.html
sqlite.org/vtab.html
youtube.com/watch?v=Jib2AmRb_rk
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

The fuck are you talking about, kid?
SQLite is just for testing software functionality before deciding if it does what you want it to do.
SQLite in production is for container-tier millennials

SQLite is good for testing or if you want to save local data for your application without implementing it yourself (firefox uses it for cookies, history and user data in general). For online services? Never, it wasn't design for it (e.g. write lock on the whole file, you can have many readers but only one writer).

>sqlite.org/whentouse.html
>SQLite does not compete with client/server databases. SQLite competes with fopen().

>SQLite in production is for container-tier millennials
Please, bitch. SQLite is used in production in million of embedded, Android and Apple devices. Every app not saving meme data is using the native SQLite storage.
It is also used in web pages (through the deprecated websql API, for which a relational alternative doesn't exist). Also in browser extensions.

>written in C
>based on PosgreSQL
>portable single file for database
>code is just a single small library no need to even download the library, it is included by default in Android, macOS and iOS, and apparently also Wanglows 10.
>APIs for programmer-friendly usage in Android and iOS.
>can be used in web pages through websql
>based CoC taken from St. Benedict that triggers s-o-y-boys.

I use SQLite in the same way I use spreadsheets.

If you want something large, use an actual database system.

wrong. Skype, Firefox and Chromium use sqlite in production, brainlet.
It's by far the best database system for anything small, which is majority of things. Big ass websites obviously it makes no sense.
It is also very powerful database system.

>browsers and mah phone is "production"
K

Mah mobile apps for big corporate clients that must work offline definitely are. These are not fancy user apps kiddo, these are mobilized business processes, if they don't work, money and data is lost.

I bet you call your mac "production" too

>most used programs in the world
retard

Like Angry Birds

>mac
My boss is too stingy for that. He only buys the cheapest dell or acer.

>locks file
Nothing personal kid

i am working on porn stars search engine with better coverage than big players and use sqlite for it

nigga what? its based on 100% sql standard, not postgresql you absolute mong

it's a pretty common backend for applications that need persistent storage for datasets where nobody wants to fuck around with json, yaml or god forbid xml.

>redpill
kiddo, you haven't even understood the basics. read a book or wikipedia

>not postgresql you absolute mong
It follows PostgreSQL's interpretation of what SQL might mean.

pgcon.org/2014/schedule/events/736.en.html

having had a look at the slides, it looks more like its intention is to be fully sql standard compatible with no additions like proprietary types, etc like mysql, mariadb, oracle mssql or db2 have it. it happened to have its roots from the pgsql development but isn't really a fork nor much influenced by it other than having a compatibility in terms of pure sql

that's also what the slides more or less imply. shit that you do in sqlite can be pretty much copied 1:1 to pgsql without any or much adjustments. regardless, they are both good projects and both serve an entirely different purposes

I've heard Hipp mentioning something about the storage layer being modular and that some embedded projects write their own for a specific environment and use plug the rest of the engine on top of it. That sounds like it could be useful.

I'm using this in a desktop application I'm writing to sort and tag my hentai collection, what are the actual alternatives to persisting data other than SQLlite? I'm not going to write everything to text files.

>only buys the cheapest dell or acer
A-user, is your boss j-jewish?

see /thread

sqlite handles large databases just fine. What it doesn't do well is concurrency.

sqlite.org/limits.html

sqlite.org/vtab.html

This allows you to use the SQL engine over any data backend.

Excel can be used as a backing store if you really want to avoid a regular installed database or text files.

SQLite for embedded software/lightweight database use.

If you're thinking of going full ENTERPRISE programming, then SQLite isn't for you.

muh apps.

Attached: 1530458446778_0.jpg (558x695, 97K)

Most programs have no business running on more than one core, because most programs are not the raison d'etre of that computer.

sqlite isn't for running webapps. Not serious ones anyway. sqlite does not compete with mysql or postgresql or oracle or db2.

I actually use SQlite DBs as application files.

it is not as good at / or doesn't support caching, indexing, pooling, etc. It's a data store, but it's not a feasible database "server"

Yeah it's great for that honestly. Rolling your own application file format is a pain in the ass that gets old really quick. Even shit like "zip of a pile of files" is an annoyance.

It's actually a perfectly fine server-side database if you don't have 100 inserts per second or terabytes of data.

Does the lack of a proper type system bother anyone else? I had a project that would seemingly been perfect for it, but read that and noped right out to postgress.

types would be nice but it's certainly not a deal breaker.

Embedded database.
If I want my program to persist some data, but don't need a big relational database like Postgres, then this is enough.

It's fine for servers if you're certain you won't need to scale horizontally / are certain you can serialize all DB writes and not bottleneck.

For something like an IoT wifi config webapp, it's perfect. Couldn't ask for better. For blogs on the internet, that are read-heavy/write-light it's perfectly sufficient. But beyond that think carefully before using it instead of a proper client/server db.

It's great for if you need a database for a normal application, or even on a phone.
Don't use it for Servers. It's not made for that.

Sqlite pretty much exists for when you need to save shit in your application and you realize a shitty textfile isn't complex enough (no nesting), and JSON is terrible since you need to rewrite the entire massive JSON object on every change, which is a no-go for performance.

youtube.com/watch?v=Jib2AmRb_rk

the creator's talk on it is bretty good, but is the answer

90% of websites on the web would do just fine on SQLlite.

> muh concurrency

Sure. So how many requests are you getting per second? How long does a write take?

i like that applications that use it. i was trying to delete Jow Forums links from my firefox history. but selecting all 50,000 history entries and click delete froze. so i opened the places database, delete from moz_historyvisits where the place name is like Jow Forums and it's done instantly. don't know how or why firefox fucked that up in the interface but sqlite makes it easy.

wow, unironically kys retard.

>my firefox history
>firefox