3 ms·

This is a good example of someone twisting the term "serverless" to capture attention: > Serverless Database Engine > Most NoSQL database engines (i.e. MongoD

This is a good example of someone twisting the term "serverless" to capture attention: > Serverless Database Engine > Most NoSQL database engines (i.e. MongoDB, Redis, CouchDB) are implemented as a separate server process. Programs that want to access the database communicate with the server using some kind of interprocess communication (typically TCP/IP) to send requests to the server and to receive back results. UnQLite like SQLite does not work this way. With UnQLite, the process that wants to access the database reads and writes directly from the database files on disk. There is no intermediary server process. The fact that it's embedded doesn't actually have anything to do with what popular "serverless" architectures are designed to solve, i.e. writing code that does not need to run in a specific server process to be invoked on demand. By their definition of serverless, pretty much any library is "serverless"... Edit: This is referring to "Classic Serverless" (https://sqlite.org/serverless.html https://sqlite.org/serverless.html) not "Neo-Serverless" architecture (my definition is more like "Neo-Serverless"). Thanks parhamn for pointing out the distinction.

parhamn 8y ago
That doesn't seem fair. The word you quoted isn't even in the section you provided. The use of "server" is interchangeable with daemon/isolated-process here. That section seems like a decent explanation of daemon vs embedded for the junior dev.
- ankrgyl 8y ago
  Huh? It's literally in the "Serverless Database Engine" section. I can update the quote to include the header.
  - parhamn 8y ago
    Even then, "twisting" is a stretch (especially the connoted maleficence). I think most people would realize these are unrelated and there seems to be a quite of precedence for talking about daemon-less as "serverless" [1]. [1] https://sqlite.org/serverless.html https://sqlite.org/serverless.html
    - ankrgyl 8y ago
      Fair enough, the "classic serverless" vs "neo-serverless" distinction directly addresses my point. I have added this clarification in my original point.
teraflop 8y ago
The UnQLite website has described it as a "serverless database engine" since at least 2013 (according to the Wayback Machine), long before it acquired its current buzzwordy definition. If you ask me, using the word "serverless" to mean "a library that doesn't need a separate server process" makes a whole lot more sense than "a system that runs your code on a server that you don't control".

parhamn 8y ago

That doesn't seem fair. The word you quoted isn't even in the section you provided. The use of "server" is interchangeable with daemon/isolated-process here. That section seems like a decent explanation of daemon vs embedded for the junior dev.

ankrgyl 8y ago
Huh? It's literally in the "Serverless Database Engine" section. I can update the quote to include the header.
- parhamn 8y ago
  Even then, "twisting" is a stretch (especially the connoted maleficence). I think most people would realize these are unrelated and there seems to be a quite of precedence for talking about daemon-less as "serverless" [1]. [1] https://sqlite.org/serverless.html https://sqlite.org/serverless.html
  - ankrgyl 8y ago
    Fair enough, the "classic serverless" vs "neo-serverless" distinction directly addresses my point. I have added this clarification in my original point.

teraflop 8y ago

The UnQLite website has described it as a "serverless database engine" since at least 2013 (according to the Wayback Machine), long before it acquired its current buzzwordy definition. If you ask me, using the word "serverless" to mean "a library that doesn't need a separate server process" makes a whole lot more sense than "a system that runs your code on a server that you don't control".