On Sunday, January 12, 2020, Roman Fleysher <roman.fleys...@einsteinmed.org> wrote:
> > I use SQLite over GPFS , but in DELETE (which I think is the default) > mode. Not WAL mode. No issues with locking, except performance when > accessing concurrently from multiple nodes. As others pointed out, this has > to do with the overhead due to lock requests. GPFS must coordinate with > many nodes. My observation is that when concurrent access is from a few > nodes, the performance is OK even though number of nodes is always the > same. Thus, GPFS coordinates in some smart way only between nodes actively > involved. > > One reason I do not use mySQL with its more efficient network access is > that sys admin must set it up. With SQLite, I am independent. In addition, > in my SQL there are authentication issues to be dealt with. I rely on GPFS > file access permissions (access control list, ACL) to regulate access to > database. > > I heard about BeadrockDB, which internally uses SQLite and provides > network access with replication. I have not tried it and do not know what > is involved. > > > MySQL and similar would indeed be nice to use, but in addition to the administrative cost, there are also developer costs to get things set up so that every developer can do work in their own db without affecting the production db, as well as complexity costs with getting data into those dbs. Contrast this with just copying the sqlite file(s) as needed (though integrity concerns still exist). So I'm mostly weighing options. The data is very much many-reads, few-writes. Also considering just using an external locking service and simple flat files, but this has obvious downsides of fewer (if any) data types, no joins, no transactions, etc. I may give this a try and see if the perf hit is tolerable. _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@mailinglists.sqlite.org http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
