3 ms·

It's akin to asking the following: What does a car do that you can't trivially do with something else ? Like a boat or an airplane ? You simply cannot compare

It's akin to asking the following: What does a car do that you can't trivially do with something else ? Like a boat or an airplane ? You simply cannot compare an in-memory Key-Value store, to a RDBS. And that's on a conceptual level. If you then consider performance, network latency and the guarantees, we're absolutely comparing airplanes to donkeys: You wouldn't use an airplane to climb up a rough mountain, and you certainly wouldn't prefer a donkey to travel to the other side of the world.

gavinhoward 2y ago
SQLite has the option to run on a pure in-memory database.
- remram 2y ago
  SQLite is not a server, you can't use it as a shared cache or job queue or pubsub mechanism. On the other hand Redis is a bad database so I would say the use cases don't overlap.
  - andrewstuart 2y ago
    You can use SQLite as a queue it is better suited to the task than redis. SQLite supports atomic operations - the key requirement of a message queue.
    - aneutron 2y ago
      That is a very bold claim. A message queue can have many different requirements: Some message queues tolerate lost messages, others don't. Some require a notification mechanism (i.e. a push model instead of a polling model). Other require precise management of dead letters. All this to say that, yes, you theoretically CAN use SQLite as a message queue. But atomic operations are usually WAY lower on the "must have" list for a message queue than other parameters. The easiest way you could verify this is by looking at the guarantees provided by some of the most known MsgQueues.
      - andrewstuart 2y ago
        Atomic operations are the baseline requirement for implementing a queue. This is what ensures only one reader gets a message. SQLite has it, redis does not.
    - remram 2y ago
      > is better suited to the task than redis That is a claim not an argument, and again it can't be a shared queue because no networking. Or do you believe Redis doesn't have atomic operations?

gavinhoward 2y ago

SQLite has the option to run on a pure in-memory database.

remram 2y ago
SQLite is not a server, you can't use it as a shared cache or job queue or pubsub mechanism. On the other hand Redis is a bad database so I would say the use cases don't overlap.
- andrewstuart 2y ago
  You can use SQLite as a queue it is better suited to the task than redis. SQLite supports atomic operations - the key requirement of a message queue.
  - aneutron 2y ago
    That is a very bold claim. A message queue can have many different requirements: Some message queues tolerate lost messages, others don't. Some require a notification mechanism (i.e. a push model instead of a polling model). Other require precise management of dead letters. All this to say that, yes, you theoretically CAN use SQLite as a message queue. But atomic operations are usually WAY lower on the "must have" list for a message queue than other parameters. The easiest way you could verify this is by looking at the guarantees provided by some of the most known MsgQueues.
    - andrewstuart 2y ago
      Atomic operations are the baseline requirement for implementing a queue. This is what ensures only one reader gets a message. SQLite has it, redis does not.
  - remram 2y ago
    > is better suited to the task than redis That is a claim not an argument, and again it can't be a shared queue because no networking. Or do you believe Redis doesn't have atomic operations?