ipfs-cluster VS dqlite

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.

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.