>>yep, but again who cares, 99% of the world is on windows<<
He does. Since I have no idea what the requirements of this project
are, and he does, hopefully the points he wrote are relevant. If one
of the requirements for this project are that it run on BeOS on a 400
mhz processor with half a me
Hi,
> > 10. SQLite runs on almost ever operating systems. SQL Server runs
> > on MS Windows exclusively.
> >
> yep, but again who cares, 99% of the world is on windows
This is probably true for desktops, but not for servers.
And a lot of people cares.
> > 13. Open source and Free Software such
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [0120 19:20]:
> As well, what if you want to move the database to another machien to
> distribute workload.
> Well, our bug tracking system Swatter we did use Sqlite but we had to write
> the thead syncronization layer.
> In fact, it is a .nET applicat
On Mon, 2005-01-31 at 11:31 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 99% of the world is on windows
I can't speak for the whole world, but visitors to the
SQLite website over the past two weeks break out something
like this:
Windows: 80.6%
Linux:14.9%
Mac: 4.5%
(There was real
* Brass Tilde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [0121 18:21]:
> > If you install MS SQL server you run a network based service that
> > is vulnerable to attack. If you run Sqlite you don't run any
> > service and thus are invulnerable (to network service based
> > infections).
>
> Not relevant. No reference to
> > If you install MS SQL server you run a network based service that
> > is vulnerable to attack. If you run Sqlite you don't run any
> > service and thus are invulnerable (to network service based
> > infections).
>
> Not relevant. No reference to "network service based infections" was
> made
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Let me clarify then. 100% of our customer want web based. With .NET
> and SQL server we can throw in our data adapter and be off to the
> races. We don't have to worry about future scalability. With
> Sqlite, you dont' receive a trusty data provider. Good ones
I greatly appreciate your answer Fred.
- Original message -
From: "Fred Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 1/31/2005 1:37:50 PM
Subject: RE: [sqlite] SQLite Advocacy
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Mario Ruggier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Monday, January 31, 2005 12:
ou have to do everything else on top of.
Allan
- Original message -
From: "cirisme" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 1/31/2005 12:24:23 PM
Subject: Re: RE(1): [sqlite] SQLite Advocacy
> >>Their are still sa couple extra features missing from this db that
> would
>>Their are still sa couple extra features missing from this db that
would make it a true contender for business software.<<
Too general of a comment. If the business software requires a
distributed database, SQLite fits the bill. If the business software
requires a central database, SQL Server
> >> 11. By using SQLite you eliminate a possible source of virus
> >> infection. SQL server has been targeted in at least one major virus
> >> outbreak.
> >
> > Completely and totally false. Applications that use SQLite can be
> > corrupted and infected by viruses just like any other executable
> > 10. SQLite runs on almost ever operating systems. SQL Server runs
> > on MS Windows exclusively.
> >
> yep, but again who cares, 99% of the world is on windows
About half of the web servers on the internet
are not windows based:
http://news.netcraft.com/archives/web_server_survey.html
> >
nd we can't depend on
reports when it comes to our clients.
The bottom line here though is Sqlite does test out as a great database.
Allan
- Original message -
From: "Dan Keeley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 1/31/2005 11:44:12 AM
Subject: RE: RE(1): [sqlite] SQLite A
Yeah, good points. So if their are holes! You are at fault, not the
database. You might as well go with SQL server for CYA! : - )
Allan
- Original message -
From: "Roger Binns" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 1/31/2005 11:42:46 AM
Subject: Re: RE(1): [sqlite] SQLite A
, but my experience has been truly more positive wiht windows. I like
Linux a lot to man.
Allan
- Original message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 1/31/2005 11:42:32 AM
Subject: Re: RE(1): [sqlite] SQLite Advocacy
> On Jan 31, 2005, at 9:31 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > No
Not true at all. In fact, from experience, the Linux OS is much more full
of holes than Windows. >It appears most hate Microsoft so thier OS gets
the most virus and hackers. All I can say is we >independently did a test
with Linux and Windows we isntalled a default OS and put it on the net
Not true at all. In fact, from experience, the Linux OS is
much more full of holes than Windows. It appears most hate
Microsoft so thier OS gets the most virus and hackers. All
I can say is we independently did a test with Linux and Windows
we isntalled a default OS and put it on the net wit
On Jan 31, 2005, at 9:31 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not true at all. In fact, from experience, the Linux OS is much more
full of holes than Windows. It appears most hate Microsoft so thier
OS gets the most virus and hackers. All I can say is we independently
did a test with Linux and Window
my comments below.
- Original message -
From: "Downey, Shawn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: 1/31/2005 11:11:27 AM
Subject: RE: [sqlite] SQLite Advocacy
> Thanks everyone for there input. See below for the arguments I've
> compiled so far. Please let me know if I am incorrect on any of thes
Their is a WinCe version of SQL server and it has a huge memory cross section.
It appeared buggy as well. I did my best sometime ago to convince a group to
allow use of this database in our embedded product but I received the same free
mantra garbage. Even though i could run test after test p
Does Sqlite support multiple data files yet along with a thread syncronized
engine? As well, does it have a distributed data access layer? Their are
still sa couple extra features missing from this db that would make it a true
contender for business software. I am not knocking it all. It is t
21 matches
Mail list logo
