Twelve years of distributed SQLite

Having used D1 in production - it's not very reliable. There was a comment on HN from one of D1 devs [1] saying that D1 is a sql wrapper on top of durable objects that mimicks sqlite distributed like nature.

> I'll let you in on a sort of dirty secret: It's almost always better to use Durable Objects storage, rather than D1. Even if you only want a single global database, it's better to implement that as a singleton Durable Object, than by using D1. Because that's all D1 itself actually is: a singleton Durable Object that exposes an API to its SQLite database. It's just a wrapper.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48611834

Is there a project that does all of these together?

- embeddable like sqlite

- clustered like dqlite

- has a standalone node like rqlite

- can be backed up to S3 like litesteeam

- optionally AP like cr-sqlite alongside CP

Was a fun read until the end where the author made damn sure that history records who drew the blueprint.

I maintain one of the client libraries for rqlite - I’ve found it an excellent concept really well implemented. One of my favourite bits is it gives you back json making Dapper-like mapping super easy in .NET and I suspect other languages.

I have never examined this in any detail before. It looks far easier than the mass majority of clustered database architectures.

https://rqlite.io/

I know that latest rails suggests SQLite as one of the production options. I don’t get how it’d work with concurrent access though. Time to look into it.

Very timely for me. I run dqlite in a small cluster and I'm looking to move off it to something more robust. What's recommended in this regime?

There is also hctree from sqlite.

Like the idea of distributed SQLite, but do we have benchmark? What use cases it has advantage?

[flagged]