bolt VS rqlite

This crate started out as just a way for me to learn how boltdb works, while learning Rust at the same time. But somehow people started finding and using it and seem to like the simple API, so I figured I might as well share it in case someone else finds it useful too. If you want to know more about my motivations and the history of this crate, you can read the release notes on version 0.8.0!

Some example of embeddable database could be genji, badger and boltdb

Designing Data Intensive applications- specifically chapter 3 and 4 which deal with strategies and algorithms for storing and encoding data to be stored on disk and their pros and cons.

Once you read that, I'll suggest reading the source of a simple embedded key-value database, I wouldn't bother with RDBMs as they are complex beasts and contain way more than you need. BoltDB is a good project to read the source of https://github.com/boltdb/bolt, the whole thing is <10k lines of code and is a full blown production grade system with ACID semantics so packs a lot in those 10k and isn't just merely a toy.

Bolt db and Bolt db's author post to go with it.

https://github.com/boltdb/bolt is a ACID B+ tree key-value store

For a single server, SQLite, or boltdb[0]

I've never had to scale horizontally. I develop in Go and you can get very far along with just vertical scaling (aka beefier hardware).

Therefore I can't give concrete examples of a distributed db-as-a-library.

But all that you need is to extend the functions that fetch data to not just fetch from disk but from "peers" as well. For this to work you need servers (instances) to know about each other, and as you add more they also get added to their peers - sort of like a bittorrent network. I don't think it's difficult to do.

SQLite might not be suited for being distributed (although RQlite[1] claims to have done it).

Making a distributed data storage based on boltdb[0] is probably more feasible.

Whatever the case, there's no reason why a data storage engine can't be a library, even if it's distributed.

[0]: https://github.com/boltdb/bolt

[1]: https://github.com/rqlite/rqlite

rqlite[1] could basically do this, if you use read-only nodes[2]. But it's not quite a drop-in replacement for SQLite at the write-side. But from point of view of a clients at the edge, they see a SQLite database being updated which they can directly read[3].

That said, it may not be practical to have hundreds of read-only nodes, but for moderate-size needs, should work fine..

Disclaimer: I'm the creator of rqlite.

[1] https://rqlite.io/

[2] https://rqlite.io/docs/clustering/read-only-nodes/

[3] https://rqlite.io/docs/guides/direct-access/

Not particularly. A C compiler is only needed for the SQLite source code.

I originally provided these musl-based builds so I could provide rqlite Docker images based on Alpine[1]. But now the Docker release process simply builds rqlite from the source during the image-creation process[2].

[1] https://hub.docker.com/_/alpine

[2] https://github.com/rqlite/rqlite/blob/master/Dockerfile

Not Jepsen tested but I'd like rqlite [0] would be in the running and meet the requirements.

0. https://rqlite.io/

I’ve been pondering doing something like this with SQLite. The primary db is local/embedded on the user’s machine and use something like https://github.com/rqlite/rqlite to sync on the backend.

It also means it would be fairly trivial to allow users/orgs to host their own “backend” as well.

SQLite is not competing with RDMBSes. SQLite is competing with fopen().

There are of course solutions which wrap this fopen() replacement in a network/cluster-aware tools, e.g. https://github.com/rqlite/rqlite - these are competing with postgres.

Seems like you could do the same with rqlite [1], since SQLite supports JSON.

[1]: https://rqlite.io