3 ms·

You may have misunderstood, we're not using it as a postgres replacement. I agree with this take, hence my original assertion that it isn't a drop in replaceme

You may have misunderstood, we're not using it as a postgres replacement. I agree with this take, hence my original assertion that it isn't a drop in replacement for a DB server. We are using it as a replacement for RocksDB - we need a richer way to store data than a simple key value store. It still runs on a server though, and therefore it would be useful to be able to read data remotely, even if that isn't the primary purpose.

BuckRogers 5y ago
My mistake then. I read it as "we tried it as a Postgres replacement, even though many here suggest it was going to work". I've toyed with SQLite as replacement for a client-server database for personal projects. While I stand by my overall dim assessment of SQLite, with a statically typed language and a diligently maintained data access layer (ie. one-man project), I would endorse its use on the server.