undefined

points

[-]

I used this approach to drive entire app, and it works. Nearly all data are fetched from SQLite. User can select a database, which can change app views, and the data. In my experience it is quite fast.

My example for android app:

https://f-droid.org/pl/packages/io.github.rumcajs.offlineweb...

Note that I am not android experienced programmer, and I am still learning.

by groundzeros20157 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

No. SQLite doesn't have users, proper views, row level security, proper foreign keys, or functions.

by bbkane6 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

What don't you like about SQLite views or foreign keys?

by groundzeros20156 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

For example you can’t insert or update a SQLite view.

I don’t even think SQLite lets you fully update a table schema.

If you start trying to use it for sql and not just storing rows you run into these everywhere. SQLite is not serving the same needs as Postgres.

by frollogaston5 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Yes. I already did that once though, so I skip that step now (unless ofc it's a SQLite usecase).

by crazygringo16 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Not really. They are two different paradigms. Use the one that is right for you.

SQLite is embedded for local applications with one writer mostly.

Postgres is for a client-server architecture with many writers.

When you start a project, you generally know which architecture you need.

by andai16 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

So if it needs to work offline, but it syncs with a server, then you use both? (And the schema becomes some kind of lowest common denominator?)

by preg_match14 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I would probably do an event-source architecture, where you record events on the client and then push them to the server when you're reconnected. It has a lot of benefits, for instance, trivial auditing and free serialization.

by theultdev3 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

yeah essentially, see electricsql

though they also have "pglite" running in wasm.

same concept though, sync slices to an embedded db.

by LAC-Tech9 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

SQLite is embedded for local applications with one writer mostly.

In 2026 that advice feels antiquated. SQLite now is absolutely useful now for concurrent, mutli-writer applications.

https://www.sqlite.org/src/doc/wal2/doc/wal2.md

by seki28517 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

In a lot of cases using SQLite means you write queries incompatible with RDBMS. No need to worry about race conditions or the amount of queries you make, when 100 selects are uber fast.

by SoftTalker16 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Yes, for very small or embedded, single-purpose systems sqlite is usually a good choice. It's very well tested, and there's nothing extra to run or manage. But be careful if the system starts growing beyond that, you'll want a real RDBMS before you abuse sqlite too much.

by Lio15 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Depends on what you mean by "small" and "growing".

If you mean database size, SQLite can handle massive amounts of data. I've seen 281 TB quoted as theoretical max size.