dflat VS blueboat

This is really, IMHO (as someone implements things on top of SQLite too https://dflat.io) pushes SQLite too far as the implementation of cross-db transactions have some big issues: https://www.sqlite.org/limits.html (the number of attached databases cannot exceed 10 or 125 (if you compile your own)) https://www.sqlite.org/wal.html (in WAL mode, there is no transactional guarantee for cross database transactions (atomic per database, but not cross database))

Dflat: SQLite FlatBuffers\ (4 comments)

Flatbuffers would be better as it doesn't need to deserialize at all (I think protobuf supports to partially deserialization nowadays?). I did something similar with https://dflat.io/ too!

Right now it is an exciting time for JavaScript. We just got a new shiny fast runtime Bun, with the last new kid Deno being released only 4 years ago, and we have edge computing/serverless runtimes like Cloudflare worker and Blueboat. With all these hypes for the JavaScript community, I could not help but ask, how come only JavaScript gets all these fancy new runtimes? Why don’t we hear these more often in other languages?

Hello HN! I'm building mvsqlite, a distributed variant of SQLite with MVCC transactions, that runs on FoundationDB. It is a drop-in replacement that just needs an `LD_PRELOAD` for existing applications using SQLite.

I made this because [Blueboat](https://github.com/losfair/blueboat) needs a native SQL interface to persistent data. Apparently, just providing a transactional key-value store isn’t enough - it is more easy and efficient to build complex business logic on an SQL database, and it seems necessary to bring a self-hostable distributed SQL DB onto the platform. Since FoundationDB is Blueboat’s only stateful external dependency, I decided to build the SQL capabilities on top of it.

At its core, mvsqlite’s storage engine, mvstore, is a multi-version page store built on FoundationDB. It addresses the duration and size limits (5 secs, 10 MB) of FDB transactions, by handling multi-versioning itself. Pages are fully versioned, so they are always snapshot-readable in the future. An SQLite transaction fetches the read version during `BEGIN TRANSACTION`, and this version is used as the per-page range scan upper bound in future page read requests.

For writes, pages are first written to a content-addressed store keyed by the page's hash. At commit, hashes of each written page in the SQLite transaction is written to the page index in a single FDB transaction to preserve atomicity. With 8K pages and ~60B per key-value entry in the page index, each SQLite transaction can be as large as 1.3 GB (compared to FDB's native txn size limit of 10 MB).

mvsqlite is not yet "production-ready", since it hasn’t received enough testing, and I may still have a few changes to make to the on-disk format. But please ask here if you have any questions!

This sounds quite a bit like Cloudflare Workers, and they have a comparison page - https://github.com/losfair/blueboat/wiki/Comparison-with-Clo....

> If one writes Go or Rust, there are much better ways to run them than targeting WASM

wasm has its place, especially for contained workloads that can be wrapped in its strict capability boundaries (think, file-encoding jobs that shouldn't access anything else but said files: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29112713).

> Containers are still the defacto standard.

wasmedge [0], atmo [1], krustlet [2], blueboat [3] and numerous other projects are turning up the heat [4]!

[0] https://github.com/WasmEdge/WasmEdge

[1] https://github.com/suborbital/atmo

[2] https://github.com/krustlet/krustlet

[3] https://github.com/losfair/blueboat

[4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30155295