Turso SQLite Offline Sync Public Beta

Re:Turso SQLite Offline Sync Public Beta by benwilber0 on Monday March 31, 2025 @08:05PM (#43541401)

I just wrote a post about this kind of stuff and why it's (almost always) nonsense. You will spend more time and effort trying to shoe-horn SQLite into a server database than you will ever get any benefits from.

https://benwilber.github.io/programming/2025/03/31/sqlite-is...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Turso SQLite Offline Sync Public Beta by crazygringo on Monday March 31, 2025 @08:33PM (#43541581)

Agreed. I've been seeing a lot of these posts lately, about embedding SQLite into web servers.

I think a lot of people just don't realize how few resources Postgres or MySQL use, and how fast they are. You can run Apache and MySQL and a scripting language on a tiny little 512 MB memory instance, and serve some decent traffic. It works great.

Wanting to use SQLite and deal with replication is a nightmare. I don't get it. (And I love using SQLite in apps and scripts. But not websites!)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Turso SQLite Offline Sync Public Beta by GrumpyCat42 on Monday March 31, 2025 @08:39PM (#43541628)

Yup - I just recently learned this lesson the hard way with Turso's LibSQL server. While some of the features (like s3 replication) are cool and interesting, the amount of time working around multiple writers and foreign key shenanigans was not worth it when Postgres would have just gotten the job done.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Turso SQLite Offline Sync Public Beta by NathanFlurry on Monday March 31, 2025 @08:52PM (#43541696)

Can you elaborate on both of these issues?

Vanilla SQLite solved multiple writers a long time ago when they introduced WAL in 2010. Does Turso not support this?

Is the issue with foreign keys that they're not enabled by default?

[ Parent | on HN ]