FAQ
The documentation of the sqlite module at http://docs.python.org/library/sqlite3.html
says:

"...allows accessing the database using a nonstandard variant of the
SQL..."

But if you see SQLite website they clearly say at http://sqlite.org/omitted.html
that only very few of the SQL is not implemented. I think docs should
clarify on that. Many users might be scared of using SQLite just
because of this.

Search Discussions

  • Cousin Stanley at Oct 2, 2010 at 9:15 pm

    Ravi wrote:

    The documentation of the sqlite module
    at http://docs.python.org/library/sqlite3.html
    says:

    "...
    allows accessing the database
    using a nonstandard variant of the SQL..."

    But if you see SQLite website they clearly say
    at http://sqlite.org/omitted.html that only
    very few of the SQL is not implemented.

    I think docs should clarify on that.

    Many users might be scared of using SQLite
    just because of this.
    SQLite is very widely used
    in many different contexts ....

    You might check the related wikipedia article
    and scroll down to the Adoption section
    for a brief list of some well-known users ....

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sqlite


    --
    Stanley C. Kitching
    Human Being
    Phoenix, Arizona
  • Seebs at Oct 2, 2010 at 10:06 pm

    On 2010-10-02, Ravi wrote:
    The documentation of the sqlite module at http://docs.python.org/library/sqlite3.html
    says:
    "...allows accessing the database using a nonstandard variant of the
    SQL..."
    But if you see SQLite website they clearly say at http://sqlite.org/omitted.html
    that only very few of the SQL is not implemented. I think docs should
    clarify on that. Many users might be scared of using SQLite just
    because of this.
    I would agree that the word "nonstandard" seems to be a little strong and
    discouraging. sqlite is a source of joy, a small bright point of decent
    and functional software in a world full of misbehaving crap. While it
    does omit a few bits of SQL functionality, I'd call it perhaps a "slightly
    incomplete implementation" rather than a "nonstandard variant".

    -s
    --
    Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam at seebs.net
    http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
    I am not speaking for my employer, although they do rent some of my opinions.
  • Tim Chase at Oct 2, 2010 at 10:58 pm

    On 10/02/10 17:06, Seebs wrote:
    On 2010-10-02, Raviwrote:
    The documentation of the sqlite module at
    http://docs.python.org/library/sqlite3.html says:
    "...allows accessing the database using a nonstandard
    variant of the SQL..."
    I would agree that the word "nonstandard" seems to be a little
    strong and discouraging. sqlite is a source of joy, a small
    bright point of decent and functional software in a world full
    of misbehaving crap. While it does omit a few bits of SQL
    functionality, I'd call it perhaps a "slightly incomplete
    implementation" rather than a "nonstandard variant".
    In my experience, it might be better phrased as "non-standard
    (but more adherent to standards than Microsoft SQL-Server or
    MySQL) variant of SQL". :-)

    I mean really...does *any* RDBMS actually adhere to ANSI SQL?

    -tkc
  • Philip Semanchuk at Oct 2, 2010 at 11:13 pm

    On Oct 2, 2010, at 6:58 PM, Tim Chase wrote:
    On 10/02/10 17:06, Seebs wrote:
    On 2010-10-02, Raviwrote:
    The documentation of the sqlite module at
    http://docs.python.org/library/sqlite3.html says:
    "...allows accessing the database using a nonstandard
    variant of the SQL..."
    I would agree that the word "nonstandard" seems to be a little
    strong and discouraging. sqlite is a source of joy, a small
    bright point of decent and functional software in a world full
    of misbehaving crap. While it does omit a few bits of SQL
    functionality, I'd call it perhaps a "slightly incomplete
    implementation" rather than a "nonstandard variant".
    In my experience, it might be better phrased as "non-standard (but more adherent to standards than Microsoft SQL-Server or MySQL) variant of SQL". :-)

    I mean really...does *any* RDBMS actually adhere to ANSI SQL?
    That's what I was thinking. Most of them achieve 90 - 98% and implement their own extra 10% of non-standard extensions. One just has to hope that the bits one needs are not in the missing 2-10%.

    I agree with the OP that the Python doc description of SQLite, while factually correct, seems a bit severe.

    Cheers
    Philip
  • Antoine Pitrou at Oct 2, 2010 at 11:39 pm

    On Sat, 2 Oct 2010 19:13:11 -0400 Philip Semanchuk wrote:
    On Oct 2, 2010, at 6:58 PM, Tim Chase wrote:
    On 10/02/10 17:06, Seebs wrote:
    On 2010-10-02, Raviwrote:
    The documentation of the sqlite module at
    http://docs.python.org/library/sqlite3.html says:
    "...allows accessing the database using a nonstandard
    variant of the SQL..."
    I would agree that the word "nonstandard" seems to be a little
    strong and discouraging. sqlite is a source of joy, a small
    bright point of decent and functional software in a world full
    of misbehaving crap. While it does omit a few bits of SQL
    functionality, I'd call it perhaps a "slightly incomplete
    implementation" rather than a "nonstandard variant".
    In my experience, it might be better phrased as "non-standard (but more adherent to standards than Microsoft SQL-Server or MySQL) variant of SQL". :-)

    I mean really...does *any* RDBMS actually adhere to ANSI SQL?
    That's what I was thinking. Most of them achieve 90 - 98% and implement their own extra 10% of non-standard extensions. One just has to hope that the bits one needs are not in the missing 2-10%.

    I agree with the OP that the Python doc description of SQLite, while factually correct, seems a bit severe.
    You can open an issue at http://bugs.python.org

    Regards

    Antoine.
  • D'Arcy J.M. Cain at Oct 2, 2010 at 11:02 pm

    On 02 Oct 2010 22:06:58 GMT Seebs wrote:
    I would agree that the word "nonstandard" seems to be a little strong and
    discouraging. sqlite is a source of joy, a small bright point of decent
    and functional software in a world full of misbehaving crap. While it
    does omit a few bits of SQL functionality, I'd call it perhaps a "slightly
    incomplete implementation" rather than a "nonstandard variant".
    If you are looking for better wording I suggest "...an almost complete
    implementation..." instead. Sounds more positive.

    --
    D'Arcy J.M. Cain <darcy at druid.net> | Democracy is three wolves
    http://www.druid.net/darcy/ | and a sheep voting on
    +1 416 425 1212 (DoD#0082) (eNTP) | what's for dinner.
  • Lawrence D'Oliveiro at Oct 3, 2010 at 7:09 am

    In message <slrniafbbr.2iq9.usenet-nospam at guild.seebs.net>, Seebs wrote:

    sqlite is a source of joy, a small bright point of decent
    and functional software in a world full of misbehaving crap.
    Have you learnt how to be selective in your downloads yet?
  • Seebs at Oct 3, 2010 at 3:11 pm

    On 2010-10-03, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    In message <slrniafbbr.2iq9.usenet-nospam at guild.seebs.net>, Seebs wrote:
    sqlite is a source of joy, a small bright point of decent
    and functional software in a world full of misbehaving crap.
    Have you learnt how to be selective in your downloads yet?
    Sadly, as a side-effect of my day job, I am often obliged to work with
    arbitrary software that someone somewhere specified as part of a requirement.

    It is stunning how often you can guess which of two packages will be the
    source of a bug just by seeing which one hurts more to look at.

    -s
    --
    Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / usenet-nospam at seebs.net
    http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
    I am not speaking for my employer, although they do rent some of my opinions.
  • Lawrence D'Oliveiro at Oct 4, 2010 at 12:38 am

    In message <slrniah7cc.8f0.usenet-nospam at guild.seebs.net>, Seebs wrote:

    It is stunning how often you can guess which of two packages will be the
    source of a bug just by seeing which one hurts more to look at.
    QOTW. :)
  • John Nagle at Oct 3, 2010 at 6:21 pm

    On 10/2/2010 3:06 PM, Seebs wrote:

    I would agree that the word "nonstandard" seems to be a little strong and
    discouraging. sqlite is a source of joy, a small bright point of decent
    and functional software in a world full of misbehaving crap. While it
    does omit a few bits of SQL functionality, I'd call it perhaps a "slightly
    incomplete implementation" rather than a "nonstandard variant".
    That's a bit much.

    What SQLite leaves out is the heavy machinery needed for a active
    production database being used by many processes. If you want to store
    a modest amount of data for one process, perhaps with a rare conflict
    when two programs hit the same table, SQLite is fine. But SQLite
    doesn't scale. That's why it's "lite".

    Some of SQLite's good features, are achieved by rather brutal
    means. For example, SQLite supports atomic transactions. That's
    implemented by locking up all tables involved for the duration
    of the entire transaction. This is fine for low-volume updates,
    and a killer for high-volume systems.

    SQLite doesn't have a serious query optimizer, or partial table
    locking, or concurrent transaction handling, or replication.
    In other words, use SQLite in your desktop app to manage its data
    or configuration parameters. Use MySQL or Postgres for your
    web site.

    (Personally, I like MySQL, but I fear Oracle will mess it up.)

    John Nagle
  • Philip Semanchuk at Oct 3, 2010 at 6:32 pm

    On Oct 3, 2010, at 2:21 PM, John Nagle wrote:
    On 10/2/2010 3:06 PM, Seebs wrote:

    I would agree that the word "nonstandard" seems to be a little strong and
    discouraging. sqlite is a source of joy, a small bright point of decent
    and functional software in a world full of misbehaving crap. While it
    does omit a few bits of SQL functionality, I'd call it perhaps a "slightly
    incomplete implementation" rather than a "nonstandard variant".
    That's a bit much.

    What SQLite leaves out is the heavy machinery needed for a active
    production database being used by many processes. If you want to store
    a modest amount of data for one process, perhaps with a rare conflict
    when two programs hit the same table, SQLite is fine. But SQLite
    doesn't scale. That's why it's "lite".

    Some of SQLite's good features, are achieved by rather brutal
    means. For example, SQLite supports atomic transactions. That's
    implemented by locking up all tables involved for the duration
    of the entire transaction. This is fine for low-volume updates,
    and a killer for high-volume systems.

    SQLite doesn't have a serious query optimizer, or partial table
    locking, or concurrent transaction handling, or replication.
    In other words, use SQLite in your desktop app to manage its data
    or configuration parameters. Use MySQL or Postgres for your
    web site.
    Granted, but we're talking about whether or not SQLite complies with the SQL standard, not whether it's suitable for an e-commerce Web site or running the NYSE.

    Cheers
    Philip
  • Lawrence D'Oliveiro at Oct 4, 2010 at 12:40 am

    In message <4ca8c9b6$0$1598$742ec2ed at news.sonic.net>, John Nagle wrote:

    (Personally, I like MySQL, but I fear Oracle will mess it up.)
    Doesn?t matter whether Oracle messes up the brand called ?MySQL? or not.
    With Free Software, it?s the software that matters, not the brand. And the
    software continues to be developed by other sources.
  • John Nagle at Oct 4, 2010 at 3:33 am

    On 10/3/2010 5:40 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    In message<4ca8c9b6$0$1598$742ec2ed at news.sonic.net>, John Nagle wrote:
    (Personally, I like MySQL, but I fear Oracle will mess it up.)
    Doesn?t matter whether Oracle messes up the brand called ?MySQL? or not.
    With Free Software, it?s the software that matters, not the brand. And the
    software continues to be developed by other sources.
    Have you tried the MySQL Windows client since Oracle took it over?
    Lots more features, crashes with C library linkage errors.

    John Nagle
  • Lawrence D'Oliveiro at Oct 4, 2010 at 9:04 pm

    In message <4ca94af8$0$1637$742ec2ed at news.sonic.net>, John Nagle wrote:
    On 10/3/2010 5:40 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    In message<4ca8c9b6$0$1598$742ec2ed at news.sonic.net>, John Nagle wrote:
    (Personally, I like MySQL, but I fear Oracle will mess it up.)
    Doesn?t matter whether Oracle messes up the brand called ?MySQL? or not.
    With Free Software, it?s the software that matters, not the brand. And
    the software continues to be developed by other sources.
    Have you tried the MySQL Windows client since Oracle took it over?
    Lots more features, crashes with C library linkage errors.
    Precisely my point.
  • Florian Weimer at Oct 3, 2010 at 2:02 pm

    * Ravi:

    The documentation of the sqlite module at http://docs.python.org/library/sqlite3.html
    says:

    "...allows accessing the database using a nonstandard variant of the
    SQL..."

    But if you see SQLite website they clearly say at
    http://sqlite.org/omitted.html that only very few of the SQL is not
    implemented.
    I think that page refers to SQL92, not some more recent version of the
    standard. There are also issues caused by SQLite's approach to
    typing, e.g.

    SELECT 1 = '1';

    returns a false value, where it would return true on other systems.

    SQLite is a fine piece of software, but its SQL dialect has many
    quirks.
  • Nobody at Oct 3, 2010 at 5:45 pm

    On Sat, 02 Oct 2010 13:06:12 -0700, Ravi wrote:

    The documentation of the sqlite module at
    http://docs.python.org/library/sqlite3.html says:

    "...allows accessing the database using a nonstandard variant of the
    SQL..."

    But if you see SQLite website they clearly say at
    http://sqlite.org/omitted.html that only very few of the SQL is not
    implemented. I think docs should clarify on that. Many users might be
    scared of using SQLite just because of this.
    I suspect that it's referring to the fact that SQLite is dynamically
    typed. IOW, the problem isn't with features being omitted, but with
    features not working how you would expect them to.

Related Discussions

Discussion Navigation
viewthread | post
Discussion Overview
grouppython-list @
categoriespython
postedOct 2, '10 at 8:06p
activeOct 4, '10 at 9:04p
posts17
users11
websitepython.org

People

Translate

site design / logo © 2022 Grokbase