Re: New word to replace "serverless"
Rowan Worth <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.db.sqlite.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAJtcO2RPcFc33ee5nUTm74GfJimOWLRxLG6u8JdTa4rg4g_MxA@mail.gmail.com> |
On Tue, 28 Jan 2020 at 06:19, Richard Hipp <[email protected]> wrote: > Note that "in-process" and "embedded" are not adequate substitutes for > "serverless". An RDBMS might be in-process or embedded but still be > running a server in a separate thread. In fact, that is how most > embedded RDBMSes other than SQLite work, if I am not much mistaken. > I think embedded does capture SQLite well though. For a lot of devs the target API is the important thing, and whether there are threads behind the scenes is something of an implementation detail. But it is certainly a nice feature of SQLite's implementation, perhaps "embedded, threadless" would work to clarify that (although it's not an objectively true description once WORKER_THREADS enter the equation). "in-thread" also has a certain appeal - it's not a term I've seen used before but it makes sense as a stronger version of "in-process." I can't find any general terms for a library which spawns threads vs. one which doesn't. -Rowan _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list [email protected] http://mailinglists.sqlite.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users