4 ms·
> Sqlite is great but it is a poor substitute for a "real" database This is true, and explicitly acknowledged by the author: > SQLite does not compete with cl
by zackelan 9y ago
> Sqlite is great but it is a poor substitute for a "real" database
This is true, and explicitly acknowledged by the author:
> SQLite does not compete with client/server databases. SQLite competes with fopen().
https://sqlite.org/whentouse.html https://sqlite.org/whentouse.html
If you're deciding between Postgres and SQLite, in most cases you're doing it wrong (there are a few exceptions, such as serving a low-traffic almost-entirely-read dynamic website can be accomplished easily with either). Usually you want to choose between SQLite and "anything else that involves writing directly to the local filesystem".
- mwexler 9y agoI would disagree. The proper question is: "do I need a structured RDBMS or not?" Then if yes, which should I use? Just saying "SQLite!" starts to sound like the Regex quote from 1997: https://blog.codinghorror.com/regular-expressions-now-you-have-two-problems/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/regular-expressions-now-you-ha... A SQL system can do many wonderous things, but there's a wide range of pain and benefit across the different systems. Think about requirements first, then tech/implementation approach. But yeah, like everyone else, I often just start with SQLite anyway!