[staticautomatic]

Can happen if you work for a Microsoft shop and it's the only DB IT will OK.

[olavgg]

In those cases I tell them that I store everything in a file(sqlite) and IT can easily backup that file. If IT needs data access, its available in the application with csv/spreadsheet export.

I promise you, they will be super happy with that!

[jiggawatts]

Riiiight up to the point that the database needs to be online and running backups at the same time.

When that occurs, your “simple” tech choice suddenly becomes a too simple straitjacket.

[olavgg]

SQLite supports online backup https://www.sqlite.org/backup.html

You can also use Litestream to create snaphots.

[staticautomatic]

I worked at a place where the head of IT/de facto CTO was well aware that SQLite is a db and insisted that if I needed a db it had to be MSSQL.

[olavgg]

But you are not supposed to tell them that you use another SQL db, you use a file as it simplies things and saves money. For example, you do not need to expose anything over the network, you do not need to setup service account and password and data access is embedded in your application which improves latency. And backup is a lot easier as you just create a daily dump from your application that writes to a backup folder and tell IT to backup that folder. People have been saving things to files for decades, and IT shouldn't worry about the data structure in that file.

This is not a lie, its about avoiding politics and fights. If they ask you to use MSSQL instead of a file, you politely ask them; why they want to overengineer and delay application development.

I've been doing this for years. It works.