> About a year ago I fervently advocated against using SQLite for storing research data, but was since proven absolutely wrong. In this article I explain where and why I was wrong, and share the real reasons why I think we shouldn't use SQLite for research: A lack of skills and time.
From the top of this article:
> Update 29 Aug 2022: There is now an update to this article where I acknowledge problems with the arguments I brought forth below. Please read the update here: Should you use SQLite?
Re:You shouldn’t Use SQLite
by ifh-hn on Saturday June 06, 2026 @02:59AM
(#48422183)
Was about to say this. Read both and the second article whilst relevant to the author who, having learned both R and python (seemingly), cannot see themselves learning SQL because... Reasons, still advocates for not using databases.
Re:You shouldn’t Use SQLite
by rekabis on Saturday June 06, 2026 @05:09AM
(#48422958)
More than that: does this guy not know of ZFS and RAID arrays? Like, you only need a little more than two dozen 24Tb drives in a stripe to get to that size. Twice that if you want redundancy.
2024 (7 points, 26 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39937543
2022 (1 point, 3 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32473183
.. safe 2022 (6 points, 11 comments) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31189341
(Link: https://www.hendrik-erz.de/post/should-you-use-sqlite)
In which the author clearly says:
> About a year ago I fervently advocated against using SQLite for storing research data, but was since proven absolutely wrong. In this article I explain where and why I was wrong, and share the real reasons why I think we shouldn't use SQLite for research: A lack of skills and time.
From the top of this article:
> Update 29 Aug 2022: There is now an update to this article where I acknowledge problems with the arguments I brought forth below. Please read the update here: Should you use SQLite?
You can buy 245TB SSDs right now and while not yet commonplace there are multiple companies making drives of that size.