[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > The powers-that-be didn't want to support > another database server (we already have Sybase) and didn't want our group's > experimental data "polluting" the production database, so the folks who > wanted it went the SQLite/pysqlite route. They were immediately bitten by > the multiple reader/single writer limitation and they tried to cram too much > data into it, so performance further sucked.
Firebird could be a solution to this. It can be used in a mode that doesn't need a server, and it has no trouble at all with concurrency or large amounts of data that I know of. In fact, a Firebird interface might be an alternative worth considering for the library. It would have most of the advantages of SQLite without these disadvantages. -- Greg Ewing, Computer Science Dept, +--------------------------------------+ University of Canterbury, | Carpe post meridiam! | Christchurch, New Zealand | (I'm not a morning person.) | [EMAIL PROTECTED] +--------------------------------------+ _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
