litefs-js VS SQLite

Fly[1] uses it

1: https://fly.io/blog/introducing-litefs/

Check this series of articles out: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7.

Also worth mentioning Fly.io's work on LiteStream [1] and LiteFS [2] giving SQLite important S3 DR/reliability & multi-node replication and scalability opens SQLite up to even more use-cases.

We're making use of this ourselves in https://blazordiffusion.com which runs entirely on SQLite, using Litestream to replicate it to Cloudflare's R2 object storage which is running on a single Hetzner US Cloud VM at €13 /mo.

As we believe SQLite + Litestream is a very cost effective solution that can support a large number of App's data requirements we've added first-class support to add SQLite + Litestream support in our Project templates [3] which uses GitHub Actions to run Docker compose App deployments along with setting up Litestream replication to AWS S3, Azure Blob Storage and SFTP in a sidecar container that also includes support running DB Migrations on Server with Rollback on failure. If anyone's looking to do something similar, the GitHub Actions that enable this are being maintained at [4].

[1] https://litestream.io

[2] https://fly.io/blog/introducing-litefs/

[3] https://docs.servicestack.net/ormlite/litestream

[4] https://github.com/ServiceStack/mix/tree/master/actions

If you are into alternative storage engines for SQLite, there is also an LSM (Log-Structured Merge-tree) extension in the main repository that is not announced nor documented but seems to work. It’s based on the SQLite 4 project.

https://github.com/sqlite/sqlite/tree/master/ext/lsm1

https://www.charlesleifer.com/blog/lsm-key-value-storage-in-...

The sqlite code base is really well done. Lots of documentation.

https://github.com/sqlite/sqlite

Especially the VM part: https://github.com/spandanb/learndb-py/blob/master/learndb/v...

Compare it with this: https://github.com/sqlite/sqlite/blob/master/src/vdbe.c

That's said, I'm curious how complete this LearnDB is. SQLite is hard to read not only it's old but also it covers a lot of SQL and following SQL spec makes hings complicated. SQLite has great test suite so it's nice if you run the suit against this implementation.

Correct, see the github mirror[1]. I don't know how well supported that feature is compared to main branch. If it was completely stable, then it would have already landed in the main stable branch. Clarity about the roadmap of that branch would be nice.

1. https://github.com/sqlite/sqlite/tree/begin-concurrent

Including comprehensive comments, documentation and tests in a codebase takes time and effort.

Failing to do so creates code that is very difficult to maintain or for someone new to the codebase to understand.

However, time and effort may not be what the organization wants to pay for, and individuals may view their own incomprehensible code as something like job security, as they can't be replaced by someone else easily.

As an example of complicated code that's still well-documented, the open-source sqlite code is a good example, about 1/4 of the B-tree file is comments, every time a variable is defined there's a short note explaining what it's used for, every function has a comment header that's comprehensive, such that someone new to the codebase could construct a map of how it all works fairly quickly. It's a good model for how to avoid the problem:

https://github.com/sqlite/sqlite/blob/master/src/btree.c