[nerdbaggy]

It must be hard to maintain their open source product. I can imagine it’s difficult to have 2 different backends that scale from self hosted to the thousands and thousands per second of the cloud. Along with the searching, HA, etc

[zeeg]

Absolutely is - sqlite had been valuable for a long time as it made testing/local dev fast, but MySQL has always been a burden. Its made it hard for us to build optimal solutions in many cases as we had to cater to multiple different approaches to a solution. With our newer stuff we're actually able to remove a lot of the infrastructure cost/complexity by using a better solution (Clickhouse). Obviously has its costs, but its a net win.

[majewsky]

> sqlite had been valuable for a long time as it made testing/local dev fast

FWIW, in my current project, I've deviated from my usual pattern of using SQLite for testing and Postgres for production and went all-in with Postgres in order to use some Postgres features that SQLite does not have (enum types, row-level locking). I have a very small shell script [1] for starting an isolated Postgres instance during test suite runs, and that works fine for me. The speed difference is about 100-200 ms per test suite run for the `pg_ctl start` and `pg_ctl stop`.

[1] https://github.com/sapcc/castellum/blob/master/testing/with-...