Well, to each their own. If you want to use it, go ahead. I think that since postgresql and mysql are both free, you would want to choose the one that's the best fit. Sqlite is built in and makes it easy to do the sample code and such, and it can be used in some cases, but if you have postgresql or mysql available, you'll probably be happier using those, especially since the same code will work on all of them.
The question was, is it okay to use it for production, or is it not recommended. I still stand by my statement that it is okay, but it is not recommended. On Thursday, March 22, 2012 7:59:26 PM UTC-7, Vasile Ermicioi wrote: > > developers themselves say 'dont use it for sites that have 100k hits/day > > > I disagree, > > look here > http://www.sqlite.org/whentouse.html<http://www.sqlite.org/whentouse.html> > > Generally speaking, any site that gets fewer than 100K hits/day should > work fine with SQLite. The 100K hits/day figure is a conservative estimate, > not a hard upper bound. SQLite has been demonstrated to work with 10 times > that amount of traffic. > > and that was written even before WAL appeared > > you can't cluster sqlite > > > you can use a clustered file system > I think cloud based hostings have such FS > e.g. Amazon S3 > > > many assumptions that were true for sqlite are not valid since version 3.7 > > SQLite is an awesome product, it supports > 1) concurrency > http://www.sqlite.org/draft/wal.html<http://www.sqlite.org/draft/wal.html> > > 2) full text search > http://www.sqlite.org/fts3.html <http://www.sqlite.org/fts3.html> with > contributions from some google engineers > > 3) R-Trees for geospacial systems > http://www.sqlite.org/rtree.html <http://www.sqlite.org/rtree.html> >
