better-sqlite3 VS sqlc

In the second video of the series, we are separating routers and adding SQLite, Better SQLite 3, Database to the application to show access to context for performing a simple query and mutation.

If I were charged with this task I'd probably take an actual SQLite DB and write methods to parse data from text files, then process it within SQLite, and serialize it back to the text file when an API method is called or after each processing step. A fresh DB engine, fully re-implemented to match SQLite's API is insane unless you're a prodigy or have a sizable team and will come with numerous downsides. I can recommend https://github.com/WiseLibs/better-sqlite3 and https://github.com/loveencounterflow/dbay

better-sqlite3 is orders of magnitude faster than the async SQLite bindings. We found this to be true when testing SQLite options for Notion's desktop app anyways.

https://github.com/WiseLibs/better-sqlite3#why-should-i-use-...

Better SQLite is a wrapper around the SQLite database engine that provides a number of improvements over the standard SQLite API. One of those benefits is type safety, Better SQLite uses TypeScript to provide type safety for queries, which can help to prevent errors.

better-sqlite3 does the job synchronously

I used better-sqlite3 . It is simple to use as it is synchronous. I don't know if it scales good (at least the docs say it) but works great for my small use cases.

Kent's recommended NodeJS module, `better-sqlite3`, has some very nifty features including the creation of JavaScript user-defined functions[0] that (if I understand this right) can be called from SQLite. Combined with TRIGGERs, I wonder if it might fire a function within the app when an UPDATE/INSERT happens from a different process? (This is me wondering out loud, I don't actually know.)

I also recommend checking out Replicache[1] and alternatives, which may be a better way to handle the networking and database replication so that it doesn't rely on the underlying DB.

[0] https://github.com/WiseLibs/better-sqlite3/blob/HEAD/docs/ap...

"Is there a way to get sqlc to use pointers for nullable columns instead of the sql.Null types?"

I came across this yesterday for golang: https://sqlc.dev which is somewhat like what you want, maybe.

Not sure it allows you to parameterize table names but the basic idea is codegen from sql queries so you are working with go code (autocompletion etc).

Agreed, but tools like https://sqlc.dev, which I mention in the article, are a good trade-off that allows you to have verified, testable, SQL in your code.

sqlc is not strictly a conventional ORM. It offers a unique approach by generating Go code from SQL queries. This allows developers to write SQL, which sqlc then converts into type-safe Go code, reducing the boilerplate significantly. It ensures that your queries are syntactically correct and type-safe. sqlc is ideal for those who prefer writing SQL and are looking for an efficient way to integrate it into a Go application.

I was browsing awesome-go for ideas on how to setup my data access layer when I stumbled on sqlc. It seemed like a great option. Code generation is a strategy often used in the Go ecosystem and making my queries safe at compile time was an idea I really liked. Knex was great, but it required of me that I test thoroughly my queries at runtime and that I sanitize my query results to ensure type safety within my application.

Now, we are going to generate the code. For this purpose, we are going to use sqlc.

https://github.com/sqlc-dev/sqlc — for use with //go:generate