Thanks for replying Phil... Actually I am not running separate websites - but I have to deploy to multiple webservers which will all serve the same pages. Each webserver will have their own copy of the SQLite code, but they need to load the data from a network file server to share the same data.
I guess this is why I am asking for feedback: it seems that this case is a marginal case for SQLite and I am just trying to assess performance and corruption possibilities in more detail than is presented on the SQLite web pages. The main point that encourages me to try SQLite is that it is recommended for 99.9% of websites. I believe my traffic is very low and SQLite should be recommended from that point of view. However, although the likelihood of two users simultaneously updating a particular record is going to be very low I believe it is going to happen that two users will try to update the database simultaneously. I know that SQLite has some file locking features that have even been improved in v 3.0. So: - will simultaneous *database* access result in corruption? - will simultaneous *record* access result in corruption? - if not, when *can* corruption occur? I don't mind making the users wait in the unlikely event of a record collision, or even drop data once in a blue moon, but corruption is not acceptable. Thanks again. Anil. -----Original Message----- From: Philip Butler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, 2 February 2007 11:39 AM To: sqlite-users@sqlite.org Subject: Re: [sqlite] Appropriate uses for SQLite I am not an expert on SQLite - but if you are running separate websites from your multiple servers, then why not use 4 instances of SQLite ?? That is unless the websites need to share the same database/tables. If they do need to share the same database/tables, then PostgreSQL or MySQL may be the more appropriate choice. They are designed to be distributed (hence their increased overhead) while SQLite is designed to be lean-and-mean. Just my 2 cents worth... Phil On Feb 1, 2007, at 7:03 PM, Anil Gulati -X ((agulati - Michael Page at Cisco)) wrote: > Hi SQLite users > > Thank you for your attention - I am just hoping for some clarification > of usability of SQLite. > Referring to: http://www.sqlite.org/whentouse.html > - SQLite works well in websites > - Other RDBMS may work better for Client/Server applications > - SQLite will work over a network file system, but because of the > latency associated with most network file systems, performance will > not be great > > I am trying to decide whether I can use SQLite for a website that runs > on 4 load-balanced servers using networked file storage mounted by all > servers for common data access. SQLite will have to load its database > from the network file space. > > These servers run multiple web-sites, hence the additional servers, > but my pages are not high hit-rate. The sites I am planning anticipate > a maximum of 200 users altogether. Current raw, uncompressed data > (mostly > text) is about 2MB growing to around 4MB. The current starter database > of 1.6MB raw compresses to 963KB. > > My concerns are: > > 1. Network file system > How bad is the latency introduced from using a network file system? > > 2. Concurrent access > I can't understand how SQLite is recommended for 99.9% of websites but > only *high* concurrency is not recommended? I currently use a flat- > file system which uses a single file per record. If users happen to > write to the same record simultaneously one of the updates will be > lost but corruption is highly unlikely, if not impossible. It seems > that for SQLite the risk for concurrent access is always data > corruption, which would be unacceptable for me. > > The issue is that there may be short periods where multiple users will > be updating around the same time and I want to make sure that the > possibility of corruption is extremely low. I am asking for more > detailed information on the above issues to clarify my decision. > > All feedback gratefully received. > Thanks. > Anil. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
