Magnus Lyckå wrote: > At 17:54 2002-04-01 -0800, William Trenker wrote: > >> but a greenhorn at extending Python yet I had a >> crude but working Python extension module for >> SQLite up and running in 2 days > > > So, we expect to see the announcement of a DB-API 2 > complient SQLite driver any day then! :-) > >> Implements a large subset of SQL92. > > > I'd say a small subset, or perhaps sideset:
If you campare it with OCELOT you are right but you have to compare it with Gadflay. > > > SQLite implements the follow syntax: > · BEGIN TRANSACTION (END COMMIT ROLLBACK) > · COPY > · CREATE INDEX > · CREATE TABLE > · CREATE VIEW > · DELETE > · DROP INDEX > · DROP TABLE > · DROP VIEW > · EXPLAIN > · expression > · INSERT > · ON CONFLICT clause > · PRAGMA > · REPLACE > · SELECT > · UPDATE > · VACUUM > (Or at least that's what the language reference at > http://www.hwaci.com/sw/sqlite/lang.html says.) > > No GRANT / REVOKE or any other kind of security. > It seems to be a plain single user thingie. > > No ALTER TABLE, SET TRANSACTION etc. Ok, these aren't > actually in Entry SQL 92, but everybody else has them... > > And COPY, PRAGMA, REPLACE, VACUUM, ON CONFLICT etc is > not in any SQL standard I know of. > > It violates SQL92 in a number of ways it seems. For > inststance, it's typeless (like GadFly) which means that > for instance "00" == "0". There are a lot of error > checking in SQL that this engine won't do. > > SQLite ignores checks in CREATE TABLE and has no foreign > keys? > > But it seems a bit closer to SQL than GadFly...and apart > from typelessness it seems to support rather extensive > SELECT statements. It might be a very useful thing I guess. > There are plenty of cases where installing an RDBMS is > overkill. > >> Small memory footprint: less than 20K lines of C code. > > > Erh? Measuring memory footprint in kLoC seems a bit like > measuring mass in meters. Although according to the 2.4.0 > release notes at freshmeat it seems the binary image needs > less than 200kB! Question is how much RAM that actual data > requires. If it lifts entire tables into RAM it might be > very memory hungry for large databases. > >> Four times faster than PostgreSQL. Twice as fast as SQLite 1.0. > > > Yea yea, it just depends on what you measure. And how. > PostgreSQL is infinitely faster on the features SQLite > doesn't support... Benchmarking is a bit too complex to > just describe like a scalar like that. > >> The author, <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>D. Richard >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Hipp, is a computer science Ph.D. who knows his >> stuff. This is not green software, it is well designed and tested. >> It was first released in May 2000 and is very actively updated and >> supported. > > > So, how active is the mailing list? And how good? I saw > a subscribe link, but no archive (maybe I just missed it.) > > The SQLite mailing list is very active. I am a list member. Jos _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )