On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 06:58:06 -0700 (PDT) Jason H <scorp...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> That's the whole point of using SQLite, it's not 'big iron' - it's a bunch of > iron filings working together. You can get a nice surprise with SQLite when you feed it with the same RAM amount you put on MySQL server. SQLite usually gets worse benchmarks because it is configured with 2MB of ram and compare it with a MySQL with full server memory (4-6GB?) > I'm just suggesting the amount of work to get such a thing going is not that > much work, but I wanted to float it here to see if there were any good > reasons why it was a bad idea. :-) > We have an app that uses SQLite, running in 4 servers, with 0mq (nanomsg soon) to get locking exclusive on writes on all databases and pass data sending raw sql inserts, updates and deletes. We don't have lot of nor big writes, never use triggers that modify data or calculate secundary data nor call now() on sql. We have not tried to run it on more servers or with bigger write load. --- --- Eduardo Morras <emorr...@yahoo.es> _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
