Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Serverless SQLite

sql.lspgn.workers.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 167 posts

Re: Serverless SQLite

#121

Post by sojournerc »

ohnemint wrote: post #86
deepstack wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You hit the nail on the head. It is all about marketing for the new front-end developers who don't want to learn "server side" manipulation db, files, etc. Personally the whole indexdb, localstorage really break the web page as a stateless model. Why do you need save so much local data to just maintain the session? Stop putting everything in the web browser.

I can see the value of serverless in general (not this hack necessarily) in small startups that don't have sysadmins on payroll but still want to rapidly deploy products with confidence that it will just work - all without worrying about infrastructure, scaling, etc. What I'm curious is if (1) serverless is cheaper than hiring competent sysadmins who can maintain the infrastructure instead and (2) are these savings w…

Heroku fits the bill for me. Very easy to manage and scale, still cheaper than an SRE or sysadmin.

Re: Serverless SQLite

#122

Post by jimbokun »

deepstack wrote: post #79
ohnemint wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't be surprised if the term originated as a marketing tactic (e.g., AWS) to seed in people's heads the idea of not having to care about servers

You hit the nail on the head. It is all about marketing for the new front-end developers who don't want to learn "server side" manipulation db, files, etc. Personally the whole indexdb, localstorage really break the web page as a stateless model. Why do you need save so much local data to just maintain the session? Stop putting everything in the web browser.

> Why do you need save so much local data to just maintain the session? Stop putting everything in the web browser.

I guess that's to replace the traditional desktop application with something that can be deployed over the web?

Re: Serverless SQLite

#123

Post by sorenbs »

picardo wrote: post #112
sorenbs wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi Picardo! We are toying around with the idea of launching a Cloud SQLite product targeting this exact use case. How large are your data sets? Would you be interested in a quick call to discuss your needs in more detail?

hey, thanks. That sounds interesting, but this is a volunteer project. I'm donating my time, so I don't think I can justify a service like that right now. The datasets are around 200MB each, just over the 100MB limit of Github.

Thanks for the details!

We would price such a service to be competitive with the obvious alternative of using a long-running VPS or ec2 instance.

Re: Serverless SQLite

#124

Post by mwcampbell »

kentonv wrote: post #105
sbergot wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think I will always struggle to understand the popularity of the term serverless. From the two definitions found in https://www.sqlite.org/serverless.html classic serverless --> "embedded database" exists and is often used neo-serverless --> I suspect that this is a marketing term used to attract cool people to new cloud offerings (like "jamstack" for services such as netlify). There is no good replacement here bec…

Look, the industry has settled on the term "serverless" to mean: "You just upload some application code and the system automatically provisions servers to run it." No one has the power to change this. It's like saying "I think the word 'spoon' is stupid, let's all call it 'scooper' instead." This is our language now, it is what it is. Vendors offering serverless solutions have to call it "serverless" whether they lik…

I think the idea is that if enough of us push back, then people will stop using that term. After all, "the industry" is made up of people whose minds we can attempt to change.

Re: Serverless SQLite

#125

Post by kentonv »

mwcampbell wrote: post #124
kentonv wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look, the industry has settled on the term "serverless" to mean: "You just upload some application code and the system automatically provisions servers to run it." No one has the power to change this. It's like saying "I think the word 'spoon' is stupid, let's all call it 'scooper' instead." This is our language now, it is what it is. Vendors offering serverless solutions have to call it "serverless" whether they lik…

I think the idea is that if enough of us push back, then people will stop using that term. After all, "the industry" is made up of people whose minds we can attempt to change.

And I'm telling you that idea is not remotely realistic. Sorry.

Re: Serverless SQLite

#126

Post by ithkuil »

chrisweekly wrote: post #82
ithkuil wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My intuition is: "Don't care where it runs, don't want to manage it, I want to pay only for when I actually use it, thanks for managing it, here's some extra cash for the effort"

(Neo-)Serverless just means billing per-request instead of per-day, right?

More or less yes.

But you can only apply that metric if you remove the end users from actually touching the machines (virtual or real).

This is the "less" in serverless.

Turns out that this is also something people want: not having to be on the hook for actually administering machines, installing security patches etc etc.

So managed (platform as a) service + fine grained billing

Re: Serverless SQLite

#127

Post by leeoniya »

vinay_ys wrote: post #116
adolph wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“less” has been in use for a long time and typically means a paradigm shift in how the is performed. Horseless carriages still had means of locomotion; driverless cars will still have a means of effecting driver functions; eggless recipes typically have some other substance to perform the job of eggs. In my mind ”less” is not as objectionable as ”-free” like “sugar-free” which isn’t to say that something isn’t sweet,…

whereas "sugarless" means its not sweet :)

but "sugar-free" means it's sweet again

Re: Serverless SQLite

#129

Post by atmin »

Very cool. I had similar idea and glad to see it implemented and working well.

Workers KV imposes 25MB limit per key. Worker memory limit is 128MB. Concatenating several values from the store or using sqlite's ATTACH DATABASE should make possible querying of about 100MB large databases, would be my guess.

Re: Serverless SQLite

#130

Post by laumars »

chrisweekly wrote: post #81
laumars wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We already had terms that covers about 90% of the different use cases: “managed”, “SaaS”, “shared hosting”, “multi-tendency”, “timesharing”.

tendency > tenancy (or tenant)

Yeah sorry, that must have been autocorrected on my phone. The words are visually similar enough that it’s easy to miss.
Post reply on HN