We haven't released it for public distribution because of support
constraints. It needs documentation, a configure script etc. If we get
around to doing that we would publish it. Currently it compiles and
runs on Linux, Windows 9x/NT and AIX.
Having said that, tell me more about your application. What level of
SQL (short lookups or long jobs)? How many users? What is the server
host? We may be able to help.
Dusan Gibarac wrote:
Is it server available for the public or everybody has to find its own
solution? We need to support access in home networks that usually consist of
few PCs.
Dusan
-----Original Message-----
From: John Stanton [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 09, 2007 12:21 PM
To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org
Subject: Re: [sqlite] multiuser DB on network share
That should work quite well. We use such a strategy to implement
remote, multi user access to Sqlite databases. the user is unconcerned
about locking or contentions.
In our case we made the server run on port 80 (HTTP) and use regular
HTTP protocol so that it easily penetrates firewalls. The server in our
case can either be a CGI process on a regular WWW server or use a
purpose developed multi-threaded daemon which gives better performance.
We make the data transport format XML for uniformity. For example if
the usage requirement were to become too intensive for sqlite we can
switch the shared database to being PostgreSQL without affecting the
clients.
Daniel Önnerby wrote:
Hi all!
At the company I work we have a windows application that use sqlite for
the document format and this works great. We are now thinking about if
it would be possible to have multiple users to access the db
simultaneously from different computers (like a enterprise edition :) ).
I have read everything about the multithreading issues and I know that
sqlite is not designed to work like this. But I have an idea on how I
might solve this in our case and would like to ask the community if you
think this is a god idea (or if it would work at all):
My idea is to create a small socketserver on the local network that the
application holds an open connection to. When someone wants to write
(lock) to the DB you always need to ask the socketserver if this is ok.
The server will not keep any track of the database itself. The only
purpose of the server is so that no one tries to write simultaneously.
The server will also notify the applications when a modification has
been made (on unlock).
So.. could this work???
Best regards and thanks for the best (and smallest) SQL database ever
made.
Daniel
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
