I see posts like this and I can't help but think: This sounds exactly like something an academic would recommend, and then you hit the reality of industry engineering.<p>Its a similar take to a lot of the negativity surrounding Next 14's stabilized server actions. The negativity is academic; the productivity is industrial.<p>Here's my counter-hype take: SQLite actually kind of sucks. It has a place, but that place isn't significantly different from where it was five years ago despite all the "serverless read replicated VC funded hacker news hype startups" work that's happened since then.<p>If you're in crazy-enterprise hell-engineering; no one is going to reach for SQLite when more robust alternatives like Postgres exist.<p>If you're trying to get something out the door fast, you've got Postgres on Supabase, you've got MySQL on Planetscale, you've got Firebase, fifteen years of database-platform development, all of these aren't just cheap, they're free, and zero maintenance, you're not going to pay more money to do more work for a worse product by setting up SQLite on your single DigitalOcean VPS. You probably won't even reach for something like Cloudflare D1; sure, its <i>interesting</i>, but why? Its just Planetscale, but not better in any way and worse in plenty (its not even really much cheaper).<p>SQLite doesn't support alter table. It doesn't have a date-time type. It doesn't enforce columnar types outside of strict mode, which isn't enabled on e.g. Cloudflare D1. Someone stop me. Everyone says "KISS, you can get so much performance out of one application server with SQLite running locally" but you can get the same f^cking performance out of one application server, and a DBaaS, like Planetscale, and its easier, and its cheaper, and you get backups, and you get full MySQL, and you get a paved-road to actually paying them $30/mo if you need to instead of hitting a bottleneck and suddenly having to wonder how the hell you're going to scale SQLite beyond this one instance ("we need VC funding for more engineers", you'll think in that moment)<p>Kent's statement "However, SQLite is capable of handling databases that are an Exabyte in size" actually makes me mad. Its <i>so ridiculously academic</i> I'm aghast anyone takes this seriously. "Oh, well, hc-tree uses 48 bit page numbers so its an exabyte, and you'll hit other application problems first anyway". No; you'll hit problems with SQLite first, ten times out of ten, it'll be long before you hit an exabyte, it'll be before you even hit 100gb.*