Hi David, On 29.10.2012 11:58, David Barrett wrote:
Because in practice, as someone actually doing it (as opposed to theorizing about it), it works great. The MySQL portions of our service are always in a semi-constant state of emergency, while our sqlite portions just hum along And given that we're switching to SSDs, I expect they will hum even better. What problems would you expect me to be seeing that I can happily report I'm not, or what problems have I not yet encountered but will -- at 100GB, or 1TB?
In your previous thread (2012-02), you have mentioned that you are about to open-source your replication method based on SQL statement distribution. Probably your work would be of interest for a huge number of sites managing data volumes around or bellow your current level, even if you switch to PostgreSQL at this point.
IMHO, there might be a future for your replication model, because I think that SQLite, can more easily (relative to other proven DB technologies e.g. PostgreSQL) be turned to DB engine for more query languages than SQL (thanks to his clever VM design).
Furthermore, AFAIK, PostgreSQL replicates at WAL distribution level, most NoSQL databases at keys distribution level, whereas your method seems more efficient as bandwidth.
Kind Regards, Alek _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
