Comment

Comment by bob1029

I really appreciate what this project is going for. SQLite with practical replication gets to be pretty dangerous for other vendors in the space. It's the last thing we really needed for our end game customers.

Unfortunately, our org is being pushed away from SQLite because our domain is highly regulated. We have a really hard time getting something like this through technical review, especially for our up-market clients. The only thing I could defend is if this was somehow part of the first party solution and code base.

I can sell SQLite to a bank if they are tolerant to single node failure semantics (I.e. vm snapshot restore). That part is no problem. Already did it half a dozen times myself. It gets tricky if they want more aggressive RPO. I cannot sell log-replicated SQLite if it relies on another, lesser-known 3rd party for that capability. I can get away with murder on my front end vendors but data vendors never seem to escape scrutiny.

I want to hate SQL Server, but it's starting to grow on me. The knowledge that I won't have to argue with a hundred+ CTO/CIOs is starting to win out over the principled nerd things.

Replicating SQLite feels like a cursed thing for many contexts - If someone isn't happy with periodic snapshots, then the nature of their business is probably pretty serious and they probably want deeper (perhaps legal) guarantees about how things would go.

parent bob1029 2 years ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton