dqlite VS ipfs-cluster

If you're interested in this, here are some related projects that all take slightly different approaches:

- LiteSync directly competes with Marmot and supports DDL sync, but is closed source commercial (similar to SQLite EE): https://litesync.io

- dqlite is Canonical's distributed SQLite that depends on c-raft and kernel-level async I/O: https://dqlite.io

- cr-sqlite is a Rust-based loadable extension that adds CRDT changeset generation and reconciliation to SQLite: https://github.com/vlcn-io/cr-sqlite

Slightly related but not really (no multi writer, no C-level SQLite API or other restrictions):

- comdb2 (Bloombergs multi-homed RDMS using SQLite as the frontend)

- rqlite: RDMS with HTTP API and SQLite as the storage engine, used for replication and strong consistency (does not scale writes)

- litestream/LiteFS: disaster recovery replication

- liteserver: active read-only replication (predecessor of LiteSync)

I'd be curious for a similar tuning with Dqlite: https://github.com/canonical/dqlite

Anyone knows how the DB this is about, https://rqlite.io/, compares with https://dqlite.io/ by Canonical (both seem to be distributed versions of sqlite)?

For folks' context, the new tool that's being discussed in the thread mentioned by the parent here is litefs [0], as well as which you can also look at rqlite [1] and dqlite [2], which all provide different trade-offs (e.g. rqlite is 'more strongly consistent' than litefs).

[0]: https://github.com/superfly/litefs

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

[2]: https://github.com/canonical/dqlite

I presume you're familiar with https://github.com/canonical/dqlite (made by my employer) and https://github.com/rqlite/rqlite (unrelated)? How will mvsqlite compare to those?

Check out dqlite, it's sqlite but with a raft consensus to distribute changes through a log: https://dqlite.io/ You can link it in as a library too, it sounds like exactly what you want.

IPFS Cluster

As Libgen is an ever-expanding collection wouldn't something like IPFS Cluster fit this a lot better?

There's also IPFS-cluster if you're into those features.

Then from there, it should be however connectable your server is. If you run multiple, there's ipfs-cluster as an option to sync them. Most of the time I simply send a CID list over ssh.

The cluster as in https://cluster.ipfs.io/ would control the pinning of data. afaik the control would be private, like what it pins. The docs have a space for a key which I assume controls it.

AFAIK you can use IPFS (& clusters[0]) without relying on the crypto parts of that ecosystem. That ought to fit rather well with the use case.

[0] https://cluster.ipfs.io/

Sounds like a job for IPFS Cluster.

Notably, NFT.Storage includes both long-term "cold storage" in the decentralized Filecoin network, as well as "hot storage" using IPFS Cluster.