300
: (
(lemmy.dbzer0.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 10 May 2026
300 points (99.0% liked)
Programmer Humor
31384 readers
819 users here now
Welcome to Programmer Humor!
This is a place where you can post jokes, memes, humor, etc. related to programming!
For sharing awful code theres also Programming Horror.
Rules
- Keep content in english
- No advertisements
- Posts must be related to programming or programmer topics
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I think you got the wrong caption. It's the world if SQLite supported multiple concurent writes.
Stupid transaction deadlocks...
In my case, I want to use sqlite locally, for development, but I don't want to add a load of jank to handle booleans for sqlite.
I use rust's SQLx which map bools to numbers so it must be a problem with your connector maybe
Yeah I should probably open an issue.
username checks out
or with their programming language
I actually started using rust well after picking this username :P
That’s what I like about Ruby ORMs. They did all the conversion for you, and you could have SQLite on your dev box, Postgres on the test server and MySQL on the annoying production host that wouldn’t run anything else.
This was 18 years ago though.
Are not all ORMs like that? I only used ActiveRecord before fucking off from backend 10 years ago
This is sqlite's intended use case. To replace configure files and local data
WAL mode makes writes a lot faster, which is sufficient for a bunch of use cases. Writers do still need to wait, but they have to wait for a shorter duration. It's still not the right choice for write-heavy use cases, of course.
I'm not actually looking for the speed most of the time, but more about preventing partial writes, so I'm still using it