However when pooling SQLite connections, along with a bigger page cache and automated prepared queries, it can allow query times in the sub-microsecond range for simpler queries, something which is just not achievable with other DBMS. This lack of pooling for SQLite is also furthered by the need to support non-WAL SQLite DB, where pooling would be problematic at best. June 6th, 2023 PostgreSQL vs SQLite these three words represent an ongoing debate in the world of database management systems. Firebird SQL is most compared with MySQL. PostgreSQL (and SQL Server, Oracle, etc) are full fledged database instances that need to be hosted on servers and managed.
On the other hand, the top reviewer of PostgreSQL writes 'A stable solution with an easy setup for media management'. SQLite gives an application a far better way to store data locally than writing to text files. The top reviewer of Firebird SQL writes 'Strong event capabilities, allowing raising and displaying events in applications'.
#Sqlite vs postgresql driver#
SQLite is usually fast enough many driver authors don't bother with automated pooling of connections, while for classic DBMS, if you don't pool, your driver is very inefficient (or you can even bork the server, such as for Oracle which just doesn't work too well with many connections/deconnections cycles). Firebird SQL is rated 7.6, while PostgreSQL is rated 8.4. The test results (notably the flat line for SQLite he remarks) indicate to me there is a constant overhead somewhere that is not mitigated for his SQLite tests, and from past experiences I would venture a guess that the connection to SQLite database is recreated each time (or often enough) rather than pooled or reused, while for PostgreSQL it is very likely pooled.
0 kommentar(er)
