9 ms·
That would be fine, sqlite takes care of correctly updating the db file, though i do need to ensure i'm writing from a single thread. And yes every update sends
by sekao 5y ago
That would be fine, sqlite takes care of correctly updating the db file, though i do need to ensure i'm writing from a single thread. And yes every update sends the whole block over, which is 1/4 of a MB (could've made it smaller but i felt that was small enough).
- xg15 5y agoI'm not so sure this would work. Yes, SQLite will do its best to synchronize the requests, but that's all built on the assumption the file exists on a normal file system with locks, consistency, etc. However, this is not the case here. At the very least, you'd have to emulate file locks on the HTTP layer - and deal with the problem of requests being delayed, getting losts, clients suddenly vanishing, etc. > though i do need to ensure i'm writing from a single thread. But how would you do that? This being a web app, it's hard to ensure you're even writing from a single machine.
- sekao 5y ago> but that's all built on the assumption the file exists on a normal file system with locks, consistency, etc. However, this is not the case here. It is the case here. Writes are happening on a normal linux VPS, and subsequently copied to S3. The read-only queries are using the HTTP VFS. It would be incredibly bad to enable direct writes to a db from arbitrary clients.
- xg15 5y agoAh, now I get it. I agree, if writes go through a backend, this should work.