9 ms·

I don't want to be a jerk but... just for the sake of common sense: - Faster? Provide a benchmark. Faster is a relative thing, faster than what? faster under w

I don't want to be a jerk but... just for the sake of common sense: - Faster? Provide a benchmark. Faster is a relative thing, faster than what? faster under which conditions? - More reliable... than what? under which conditions? how do you know it is more reliable? - More powerful? I thought SQLite is more constrained than other SQL databases. e.g: No stored procedures. Powerful? how? compared to exactly what? Nullius in verba. I don't take your statements as granted, give me a proof, otherwise it's just flatus vocis.

quinthar 10y ago
Thanks for all that Latin! Yes, it's been open sourced for under 24 hours. Those are all good suggestions.
- partycoder 10y ago
  Una lingua numquam satis est. Gratias tibi. Good luck with your project.
quinthar 10y ago
Incidentally, sqlite doesn't provide stored procedures, but Bedrock does (using a C++ plugin capability). Otherwise, SQLite is actually very feature rich; a subset of features are here: http://sqlite.org/fullsql.html http://sqlite.org/fullsql.html
- partycoder 10y ago
  Yes... but you said "More powerful", rather than just "Powerful". More implies a comparison with respect to something else... with what specifically?
  - quinthar 10y ago
    Well, with respect to stored procedures, I think C++ is a far more powerful language than MySQL's SQL-based approach -- especially since Bedrock plugins can also encapsulate schema changes. I think Bedrock's replication is definitely more more powerful than MySQL's as well. So in general I think it's more powerful than MySQL. I'd love to hear your thoughts about where MySQL has the edge, however. Thanks!
    - partycoder 10y ago
      Does it have transactions?
      - quinthar 10y ago
        Yes, SQLite has transactions, and Bedrock runs all stored procedures in transactions. However, the Bedrock::DB plugin (which is just a single stored procedure: "query") doesn't expose transactions to the caller. So you couldn't, for example, call "BEGIN TRANSACTION" from the webserver, issue a few queries, and then call "COMMIT". The proper way in Bedrock (and I'd argue, for any modern database) is to package your transactions into stored procedures that execute inside the database itself.

quinthar 10y ago

Thanks for all that Latin! Yes, it's been open sourced for under 24 hours. Those are all good suggestions.

partycoder 10y ago
Una lingua numquam satis est. Gratias tibi. Good luck with your project.

quinthar 10y ago

Incidentally, sqlite doesn't provide stored procedures, but Bedrock does (using a C++ plugin capability). Otherwise, SQLite is actually very feature rich; a subset of features are here: http://sqlite.org/fullsql.html http://sqlite.org/fullsql.html

partycoder 10y ago
Yes... but you said "More powerful", rather than just "Powerful". More implies a comparison with respect to something else... with what specifically?
- quinthar 10y ago
  Well, with respect to stored procedures, I think C++ is a far more powerful language than MySQL's SQL-based approach -- especially since Bedrock plugins can also encapsulate schema changes. I think Bedrock's replication is definitely more more powerful than MySQL's as well. So in general I think it's more powerful than MySQL. I'd love to hear your thoughts about where MySQL has the edge, however. Thanks!
  - partycoder 10y ago
    Does it have transactions?
    - quinthar 10y ago
      Yes, SQLite has transactions, and Bedrock runs all stored procedures in transactions. However, the Bedrock::DB plugin (which is just a single stored procedure: "query") doesn't expose transactions to the caller. So you couldn't, for example, call "BEGIN TRANSACTION" from the webserver, issue a few queries, and then call "COMMIT". The proper way in Bedrock (and I'd argue, for any modern database) is to package your transactions into stored procedures that execute inside the database itself.