On 13/09/2007, at 1:29 PM, Michael Watkins wrote:

> In the end, I think the sql-backed storages are useful in the
> following cases, all assuming there is a large record count - many
> millions:

One point to add to that which was part of my motivation for messing
with SQLite as a backend was simple replication of the database for
disaster recovery. Using SQL and its locking seems in my mind much
less prone to problems than something like pausing the main server
and running rsync. Getting reliable and simple replication going with
the standard storage engines is something I'd like to work on at some
point - if anyone has gone down this path I'd be very interested in
the various solutions. I did bring this up a while ago and got some
good pointers but haven't really had a chance to did into it much.

Peter W.