[drej]

Anyone can share their experience with the somewhat new STRICT mode? Does it help? I tend to use Postgres when available, primarily for the added strictness, but I'd surely prefer SQLite in more scenarios as it's easier to operate.

[masklinn]

I use strict tables. I’m now realising it did help when I migrated tables from one data type to an other, because I’d missed updating some of the code.

I didn’t realise because it was just what I’d expected, but without strict tables I’d have had to debug strange errors on retrieval rather than the type error on insertion I got.

[bob1029]

We have extremely heavy SQLite usage throughout. Strict mode would only cause trouble for us. Most of our SQLite access is managed through a domain-specific C# library we developed. It handles all of the parsing & conversion internally. We don't touch the databases directly in most cases.

[rch]

I've run into situations where I need a db, but all I have is Python, so the embedded SQLite is my best option. It would be ideal if the interface was fully compatible with postgres (or a practical subset), even if SQLite was handling storage under the hood.

[torbica]

It does not really help in our scenario. I really hope that this feature will evolve more in next versions.

[srcreigh]

What's missing for your scenario?

[torbica]

- It is annoying to have it per table and not database - No alter table (to convert existing tables) - No backward support (maybe through connection string or something)