litestack VS SQLite3

The benchmarks for LiteCache are impressive, with a small caveat. While LiteCache outperforms a local Redis installation for every read operation, it seems like there's still room for improvement, especially for large write payloads.

Luckily, the official LiteStack benchmarks include measurements for LiteCable against Redis, which I am going to quote here.

Let's quickly look into how LiteJob uses SQLite to implement a job queueing system. In essence, the class Litequeue interfaces with the SQLite queue table. This table's columns, like id, name, fire_at, value, and created_at, store and manage job details.

Next, we install LiteStack using the shipped generator:

Related: I wrote a piece last week on deploying Rails apps to production on Fly.io at https://fly.io/ruby-dispatch/sqlite-and-rails-in-production/

The work that’s made this possible is:

1. Litestack - https://github.com/oldmoe/litestack

2. Fly.io’s work on the dockerfile-rails generator detecting Sqlite and Litestack in a Rails project, then setting up sane defaults for where that data is stored and persisted in production. This is all done behind the scenes with no intervention required from the person deploying.

3. Servers are overall faster and more powerful

I hope more Rails hosts make it easier and safer to deploy Sqlite to production. It will lower costs and reduce complexity for folks deploying apps.

Didn't know that one! The litestack.gemspec shows it's a wrapper around the sqlite3 gem. So, not really comparable...

I’m working on this for Rails apps at https://github.com/oldmoe/litestack/pull/12

The idea is that people with small-to-medium size Rails Turbo apps should be able to deploy them without needing Redis or Postgres.

I’ve gotten as far as deploying this stack _without_ LiteFS and it works great. The only downside is the application queues requests on deploy, but for some smaller apps it’s acceptable to have the client wait for a few seconds while the app restarts.

When I get that PR merged I’ll write about how it works on Fly and publish it to https://fly.io/ruby-dispatch/.

Rails is the way to go. The productivity of the Ruby language is insane. It's battle tested for decades and you can easily scale your prototype.

If you want a simple app served on a single host you can try LiteStack [0] so you don't need a Redis/Postgres/Sidekiq instance, just SQLite.

Laravel is also good if you like PHP language.

[0] https://github.com/oldmoe/litestack

Extralite is a gem for working with SQLite databases. It is blazing fast (up to 11x the performance of the sqlite3 gem), and provides a rich API for accessing database data in a variety of formats.

DB: sparklemotion/sqlite3-ruby: Ruby bindings for the SQLite3 embedded database

# This configure_connection is run when each new connection is created. # see https://github.com/rails/rails/blob/main/activerecord/lib/active_record/connection_adapters/abstract_adapter.rb#L1112 def configure_connection super puts "Configuring DB connection with app-specific PRAGMA statements" conn = self.raw_connection # see https://github.com/sparklemotion/sqlite3-ruby/blob/master/lib/sqlite3/pragmas.rb conn.synchronous = 1 # normal # this is a permanent pragma but in case DB is brand new, no harm is invoking it conn.journal_mode = 'wal' # this is unnecssary b/c rails' sqlite3adapter turns it on by default conn.foreign_keys = true # this is not yet supported with convenience method #conn.analysis_limit = 400 # PRAGMA temp_store = 'memory' # hold temporary indices and tables in memory # conn.temp_store = 2 end

That looks like you're missing the ruby module, not the OS package. If you're using bundler to manage your dependencies, add gem 'sqlite3', '~> 1.3', '>= 1.3.11' to your Gemfile. For reference, I got that line from this page: https://rubygems.org/gems/sqlite3/versions/1.3.11