Tiny_sqlite Alternatives
Similar projects and alternatives to tiny_sqlite
-
-
InfluxDB
Power Real-Time Data Analytics at Scale. Get real-time insights from all types of time series data with InfluxDB. Ingest, query, and analyze billions of data points in real-time with unbounded cardinality.
-
Nim
Nim is a statically typed compiled systems programming language. It combines successful concepts from mature languages like Python, Ada and Modula. Its design focuses on efficiency, expressiveness, and elegance (in that order of priority).
-
-
-
-
SaaSHub
SaaSHub - Software Alternatives and Reviews. SaaSHub helps you find the best software and product alternatives
-
Arraymancer
A fast, ergonomic and portable tensor library in Nim with a deep learning focus for CPU, GPU and embedded devices via OpenMP, Cuda and OpenCL backends
-
-
-
SaaSHub
SaaSHub - Software Alternatives and Reviews. SaaSHub helps you find the best software and product alternatives
tiny_sqlite reviews and mentions
-
A Cost Model for Nim
I did some work on Nim's hash tables back in 2020, specifically with OrderedTable, comparable to a Python dict where insertion order is preserved. I stumbled on this table module in a roundabout way, via Nim's database module, db_sqlite. The db_sqlite module was much slower than Python for simple tests, and on investigation, I found that it didn't automatically handled prepared statement caching like Python's sqlite3 module. There were some other issues with db_sqlite, like blob handling and null handling, which led me to a different SQLite interface, tiny_sqlite. This was a big improvement, handling both nulls and blobs, and the developer was great to work with. But it also didn't support prepared statement caching. I filed an issue and he implemented it, using Nim's OrderedTable to simulate an LRU cache by adding a new prepared statement and deleting the oldest one if the cache was too big:
https://github.com/GULPF/tiny_sqlite/issues/3
Performance was hugely improved. There was another LRUCache implementation I played with, and when using that for the statement cache, performance was 25% faster than OrderedTable. That didn't make much sense to me for a 100-entry hash table, so I started running some tests comparing LRUCache and OrderedTable. What I discovered is that OrderedTable delete operations created an entirely new copy of the table, minus the entry being deleted, on every delete. That seemed pretty crazy, especially since it was already showing up as performance problems in a 100-entry table.
The tiny_sqlite developer switched to LRUCache, and I did some work on the OrderedTable implementation to make deletes O(1) as expected with hash table operations:
https://github.com/nim-lang/Nim/pull/14995
After spending a lot of time on this, I finally gave up. The problems were:
- the JSON implementation used OrderedTables and never did deletes. JSON benchmark performance was rather sacred, so changing OrderedTables to be slightly slower/larger (I used a doubly-linked list) was not desirable, even if it changed delete performance from O(n) to O(1)
- the Nim compiler also used OrderedTables and never did deletes
- Nim tables allowed multiple values for the same key (I did help get that deprecated).
- alternatives were proposed by others that maintained insertion order until a deleted occurred, but then it could become unordered. That made no sense to me.
The TLDR is, if you use Nim tables, don't use OrderedTable unless you can afford to make an copy of the table on every deleted.
Current Nim OrderedTable delete code: https://github.com/nim-lang/Nim/blob/15bffc20ed8da26e68c88bb...
Issue for db_sqlite not handling nulls, blobs, statement cache: https://github.com/nim-lang/Nim/issues/13559
- Mastering Nim – now available on Amazon
Stats
GULPF/tiny_sqlite is an open source project licensed under MIT License which is an OSI approved license.
The primary programming language of tiny_sqlite is Nim.
Popular Comparisons
Sponsored