Re:FlashDB: An ultra-lightweight embedded database
by koshergweilo on Wednesday November 09, 2022 @03:26AM
(#33528755)
I know very little about the embedded world. Does anyone familiar with that space know how this compares to SQLite?
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:FlashDB: An ultra-lightweight embedded database
by ddorian43 on Wednesday November 09, 2022 @04:07AM
(#33528980)
SQLite is too high level. Maybe compare it with LMDB.
Re:FlashDB: An ultra-lightweight embedded database
by danielEM on Wednesday November 09, 2022 @10:05PM
(#33541674)
I would like also to see comparison with lmdb, didn't dig into code, but from doc I didn't see it supporting multithreading
Re:FlashDB: An ultra-lightweight embedded database
by rroot on Wednesday November 09, 2022 @04:44AM
(#33529259)
I came to ask this. I went straight onto the website to look for SQLite comparison. It's after all the dominating embedded database.
I do realize the use cases can be different, but then say and show that in the comparison.
(I'm trying to be helpful by offering unsolicited advice :) - Brilliant work!
Re:FlashDB: An ultra-lightweight embedded database
by formerly_proven on Wednesday November 09, 2022 @05:20AM
(#33529494)
SQLite is roughly 200x more code.
Re:FlashDB: An ultra-lightweight embedded database
by CyberDildonics on Wednesday November 09, 2022 @10:17AM
(#33532782)
6MB vs 100KB, which is 60x.
Re:FlashDB: An ultra-lightweight embedded database
by nurettin on Wednesday November 09, 2022 @05:25AM
(#33529529)
I haven't checked, but they probably try to retain buffers as long as possible in order to reduce reads and writes.
Re:FlashDB: An ultra-lightweight embedded database
by sohkamyung on Wednesday November 09, 2022 @08:01AM
(#33530956)
Maybe not. This is listed as a key feature:
> Very small footprint, ram usage is almost 0;
Re:FlashDB: An ultra-lightweight embedded database
by goutham2688 on Wednesday November 09, 2022 @09:32AM
(#33532117)
SQLite is a relational database,
while FlashDB seems to be concentrating on key-value and time-series