Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: A speed comparison with sqlite

From: Decibel! <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>
To: Shane Ambler <pgsql(at)Sheeky(dot)Biz>
Cc: PostgreSQL Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: A speed comparison with sqlite
Date: 2008-01-25 06:50:53
Message-ID: 20080125065053.GN37748@decibel.org (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy
On Fri, Jan 25, 2008 at 06:26:26AM +1030, Shane Ambler wrote:
> Shane Ambler wrote:
> >Just thought I would share some rough numbers here.
> >A bit of an unusual edge case but a big time difference...
> >
> >
> 
> Just following up with this comparison.
> 
> 
> I have been in contact with the SQLite creator about this issue and have 
> found that SQLite's design leans it's default settings toward low memory 
> usage keeping with it's design goals of having a small footprint.
> 
> Even with that design goal, it doesn't lock you into that. You can tell 
> SQLite to use any memory it needs as well as how much of your db is 
> cached in RAM. You can also build SQLite to use these options as default.

Yeah, at least SQLite doesn't try or promise to be something that it's
not. They're intended for embedded apps, and they seem to do that quite
well.
-- 
Decibel!, aka Jim C. Nasby, Database Architect  decibel(at)decibel(dot)org 
Give your computer some brain candy! www.distributed.net Team #1828

In response to

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Decibel!Date: 2008-01-25 06:57:00
Subject: Re: MySQL analysis
Previous:From: Fernando IkeDate: 2008-01-25 02:07:19
Subject: Re: A speed comparison with sqlite

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group