Top
Best
New

Posted by ingve 1 day ago

Rails on SQLite: new ways to cause outages(andre.arko.net)
188 points | 66 commentspage 2
decasia 1 day ago|
I have a toy web application that accepts a very, very low rate of writes. It's almost all reads.

It is implemented like this:

- The front end uses react to draw a UI.

- It fetches data from a JSON file stored on S3.

- When we get a write request, a lamdba function reads the JSON file, parses it, adds new data, and writes back to S3.

The main selling point for me is that almost all of it is static assets, which are cheap and simple to host, and the tiny bit of "back end" logic is just one nodejs function.

The previous implementation used SQLite and a golang back end, but I eventually got tired of having to maintain a virtual machine to host it.

sergsoares 1 day ago||
Easy and useful, usually the basic is better.

I ever plan do it with sqlite, loading it at memory during app start and flush data to s3 during runtime but it create more corner cases and logic to handle.

ayende 1 day ago||
Even with very small number of requests - what happens when you have two concurrent ones?
fiskfiskfisk 1 day ago||
You can set concurrency limits per function on AWS, so you can apply a hard limit on your function to only have a single invocation running at the same time. That should give you a guarantee that data isn't lost without the producer noticing.
frou_dh 1 day ago||
I wonder whether that kind of thing is actually bulletproof and doesn't end up having 2 running concurrently in some scenario.
dismalaf 1 day ago||
Weird title, the bulk of the article talked about the same stuff various Rails/SQLite talks have mentioned, the positivity at the end is nice I guess.

The real nice thing about SQLite in prod though is how much it simplifies development and deployment. Let's be real, a lot of apps people build are relatively small, basic CRUD apps that see modest usage or are even internal-only, SQLite is perfect for that. And SQLite can scale reasonably well on modern hardware. It follows the premise of Rails quite nicely: it gets you up and running, scaling to the point you're making a decent amount of money and then you can figure out how to scale beyond that, if you need to.

curtisszmania 1 day ago||
[dead]
SchwKatze 1 day ago||
Just use Turso
wewewedxfgdf 1 day ago|
I really don't get the "use sqlite in production" thing.

What about all the important things you need in a database such as multiuser/remote access and other such things?

What do the "sqlite in production" people do when they need to examine the database/resolve an issue/do development? Also what about the limitations of sqlite in modifying database structure?

pythonaut_16 1 day ago|
Do you actually need all those things?

The simple answer to your question is you don’t. And if you do need them you don’t use SQLite.

procaryote 23 hours ago||
I'd say that for any non-toy service, the default is that you do need those things, and would probably be helped by a database that cares what type you said the column had

Can you even redeploy a sevice like this without downtime?