3 ms·
Let's say I'm building a small app that I'm hosting on some shared vps, if I think about the effort involved in setting up sqlite with litestream and just getti
by vmg12 1y ago
Let's say I'm building a small app that I'm hosting on some shared vps, if I think about the effort involved in setting up sqlite with litestream and just getting a $5 (or free) postgres provider I don't think sqlite makes my life easier.
Now if I'm building a local app then absolutely sqlite makes the most sense but I don't see it otherwise.
- bccdee 1y agoLitestream is dead simple to setup. You make an S3 bucket (or any compatible storage bucket), paste the access keys and the path to your db file in /etc/litestream, and then run dpkg -i litestream.deb systemctl enable litestream systemctl start litestream The fact it's so simple is my favourite thing about it.
- indigodaddy 1y agoAre there any use cases/documentation about how litestream can be used within a docker based deployment? (Eg where systemctl wouldn't be used)
- bccdee 1y agoYou'd probably want to put the sqlite db in a volume & run litestream in a separate container that restarts automatically on failure. Systemctl's only in there to restart it if it crashes; litestream itself is (iirc) a single cli binary.
- airblade 1y agoThis is documented on the Litestream website.
- simonw 1y agoHere's their docs on running in a Docker container: https://litestream.io/guides/docker/ https://litestream.io/guides/docker/
- victorbjorklund 1y agoEffort of setting up litestream and sqlite is less time than you spend signing up for supabase. And you can have 100 apps with their own databases for almost free (just a few cents of storage) vs 5*100 for postgres. I love postgres but in no way is it as simple to run as sqlite (pretty sure even postgres core team would agree that postgres is more complex than sqlite).