3 ms·
Litestream is indeed a missing piece of the puzzle. But it also defeats some of the purpose of using an embedded database library in the first place. Now you're
by fauigerzigerk 5y ago
Litestream is indeed a missing piece of the puzzle. But it also defeats some of the purpose of using an embedded database library in the first place. Now you're back to juggling separate processes once again.
- fsaintjacques 5y agoIf the application is in go, you can likely embed litestream.
- Glench 5y agoGood point! Although practically speaking I don't mind at all. "Juggling" is too strong a word — it's literally just starting the Litestream process and never thinking about it again. It's nice that it just slides into my existing app without any code changes.
- pkhuong 5y agohttps://github.com/backtrace-labs/verneuil https://github.com/backtrace-labs/verneuil is in-process (precisely to minimise deployment pain).
- juancampa 5y agoI had never heard of verneuil. Thanks for sharing. For anyone curious about the differences between the two: "This effort is incomparable with litestream: Verneuil is meant for asynchronous read replication, with streaming backups as a nice side effect. The replication approach is thus completely different. In particular, while litestream only works with SQLite databases in WAL mode, Verneuil only supports rollback journaling"