> ("I don't care if I lose the latest writes - just don't corrupt my database") would be very useful in many situations, and should perhaps be added/promoted in

> ("I don't care if I lose the latest writes - just don't corrupt my database") would be very useful in many situations, and should perhaps be added/promoted in a more clear fashion. PostgreSQL has such a capability; "synchronous_commit=off". If you do want performance at all costs at the risk of integrity there's a separate "fsync=off". The former is very useful, exactly what we needed on a database application I was developing. The latter I can't see a benefit to using. I'm interested now as to how it's implemented -- which APIs and what assumptions of the filesystem it makes. And therefore whether SQLite would be capable of something similar. If it exists in SQLite (I can't find it) then it needs promoting and using more. In general my interactions with SQLite have been good, but its ubiquity seems to be spreading a little plague of disk chatter and bottleneck effects on I/O. It's anecdotal, but a lot of the pauses on my Android phone seem like they might be rooted in this, too. [*] https://www.postgresql.org/docs/12/wal-async-commit.html https://www.postgresql.org/docs/12/wal-async-commit.html