[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have reorganized the archive and got all the source into it this time.
http://users.iol.it/irwin
A few notes:
1) This has nothing to do with the RPC based uSQLite project, which I
have found has the same name! That project does seem a bit dead thougth
so I shall not worry about it.
2) I have found a sec flaw where a read only user can write to the db.
Have you spotted it? There will be a fix soon....
3) When designing uSQLite, portability and the ease of implementing
clients where prime considerations rather than performance. Thats why I
used ASCII on sockets rather than a binary protocol or RPC's. However, I
have found that the system is nontheless **very** fast. Thinking it
througth, ASCII is not a handicap. Strings take the same space whilst
numbers require 1 byte per digit plus terminator, i.e. they may often
require less (int=42 would require 3 bytes to be sent). ASCII does make
things so much simpler at the framing level however, and it's easier to
debug.
4) Am I doing the right thing? Of course I think the uSQLiteServer is
the best thing since sliced bread, but then it was designed to meet my
criteria :-) OTOH reception has been mixed. I have had a couple of nice
replies on this list but overall feedback has been lukewarm to icy. I
would be interested to know if anybody out there really is interested
in the concept, otherwise I shall just keep it to myself ;-)
I like your concept and agree with your design choices, so much in fact
that I independently implemented a very similar system. In my case I
packaged the responses in XML, accepting the overhead of the necessary
parser for flexibility. Even with the added overhead it is fast enough
to get comments from users. Don't be discouraged.
JS
