Using an SQL engine to drive a relatively small database is not really very simple, IMHO. But you will notice I am a member of the SQLite fan club for some time now.
My largest dataset is somewhere just over 10K rows. I justify using SQLite by noting the advantage of using a well maintained, widely used, small footprint, database which allows me to use a well implemented "standard" data access language (read superior transportability). These advantages (read superior transportability) provide great value over my previous data management systems. Remember ISAM, Paradox, xBase, and etc.? Some of my stuff running today "grew up" on some pretty archaic technology. With each "upgrade" I noticed the things supporting SQL provided a much easier path than those that did not. Now, if it don't do no sten'ken SQL, it is toast! Fred > -----Original Message----- > From: John Stanton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 12:29 PM > To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org > Subject: Re: [sqlite] IO Access Time > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > John Stanton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>Sqlite is more than one flat file. It is impossible for it > to use less > >>resources than one flat file. > >> > > > > > > I guess this depends on the format and content of the flat file. > > > > As an experiment, I constructed a database with 16K rows with each > > row containing 3 random integers. The flat file (ascii text) was > > 999KB. The SQLite database was 566KB. So in this one case, at > > least, the SQLite database is smaller than the flat file. > > > > Without additional information on your flat file format, I would > > think it was likely that the flat file is smaller than the > > SQLite database. But it is not impossible for an SQLite database > > to be smaller. > > -- > > D. Richard Hipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > However if you stored your data as binary integers your flat > file with > 16K records would take 192K of 32 bit words and 384K of 64 > bit and each > record would be accessed very fast. > > If the data in this small set were to be addressed by content > a string > search would also be very fast and make indexing of little value. > > "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler". > ~Albert Einstein
