Re: sqlite database
On Mon 02 Jul 2018 at 10:20:00 (+0100), Joe wrote:
> On Sun, 1 Jul 2018 18:04:15 -0500
> David Wright <deblis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Sun 01 Jul 2018 at 21:36:00 (+0100), Joe wrote:
> > > On Sun, 01 Jul 2018 22:21:11 +0200
> > > deloptes <deloptes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Cousin Stanley wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > As an alternative to client-server database managers,
> > > > > such as mysql, mariadb, postgresql, etc. ,
> > > > > the sqlite embedded database manager is very useful ....
> > > >
> > > > Not sure what thread you write to, but can you do concurrent
> > > > reads/writes to sqlite3 DB?
> > > >
> > > > I think it is not possible as the process that writes, locks the
> > > > file, so just keep in mind that there are severe limitations in
> > > > the use of sqlite3 databases. Correct me if I am wrong
> > > >
> > >
> > > And the single file is vulnerable to network issues. Basically the
> > > same limitations as MS Access when used as a single-file database.
> > > Sqlite is the right answer for most single-user non-network
> > > applications,
> > … which sounds like a perfect fit for the recent thread on MariaDB.
> Not if you're trying to learn client-server databases.
Well, it's always difficult to know what the OP¹ is really after. The
?first time this came up (17 months ago), "minimal" was in the subject
line, sqlite was looked at favourably, but the fact that it had a web
interface was seen as a downer, perhaps because the word "web"
appeared to contradict "no networking".
Whether a client-server model is now required depends on how one interprets
"The [HOWTOs] I find are written assuming things that are never
identified or use some distro specific hack. Many presume a
WEB-SERVER is involved. I understand that MySQL's definition of
server is somehow different."
Again, that word "web" seems to be perceived as a problem. Now I would
hate to prejudge the OP¹'s desires in terms of *learning*, but using
their own expressed situation as a guide (the courses):
. no networking,
. single user (so likely no simultaneous writes),
. no evidence of big (TB) data,
most software selectors would choose sqlite as more appropriate than
a client-server database system (the horses).
> > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2018/06/msg00757.html
> > > but
> > > not for anything more demanding. Horses for courses, as ever.
> > … but I'm not sure whether we were given the use case in that thread.
It did occur to me while writing this that the OP¹ has asked here
about PDAs running Debian for data collection, and about transferring
files between devices by using their USB ports. If the use case is the
accumulation of said data, I don't see any pressing need for a
client-server model, do you?
¹ OP of the thread I referred to.