Please check back in a few weeks.
If you would like to leave comments describing the kinds of problems you would like JSON support in SQLite to solve, I promise to read them all and give them careful consideration.
I think in android this could be really important as a way to deflate objs into native types in c-land -- Java parsers on android are so slow that Facebook had to move to flat buffers to avoid them.
1) JSON support, as is being offered as described in the post. I want to do the following in SQLite (look to MongoDB(!) documentation for syntax):
a) Inserts. You know, regular inserts.
b) Upserts. The 'hated' database (Mongo, obvs) has this easily-configurable upsert ['replacements'?], that's incredibly easy to use.
c) Bulk upserts, inserts and deletes.
2) Cheap-ish online database that you can probably use Amazon S3 for, which I am going to make my institution (University/employer) pay for anyway. Things I care for are: a) you take care of all the deployment details and provide support when I need one and b) don't throw me off your service when I cross your limits because I've overused them because I'm a data-hoarder but I'll lose my life's worth of work if you throw me off your service.
I would also love it if your offered a choice of setting up couple of indexes very easily (using JSON, obvs), and offered a visual explorer of data in the database (relevant because a certain mongo service offers an awesome data explorer).
Please understand that a very large majority of your users is NOT doing complex joins or using other advances features of the database. As an engineer, I would love it if my users used the most advanced features and let me code the funnest, cutting-edge algorithms, but that's not what I want as a user. All I ask is simple inserts, deletes, upserts, an online service to handle them, and an ability to do this all using JSON. This is not going to make the most exciting days of your work-life, but I would be an extremely happy person if I were able to use these services.
Sidenote: Since I may never have chance to an SQLite person again, I'll bring this up even though this is likely WAY off-topic. I am a researcher who likes to HOARD data. I like storing data in my Uni's server, that has a limit on file size/total size. IF you created the ability to store the same database across several files, I would be most grateful to you.
PS: Love your documentation, guys. You really set the bar for the awesomest, most easily-understandable documentation of extremely technical and advanced subject matters in the field. All my attempts to make my code readable are attempts to merely emulate your awesomeness. : )
Second problem is that S3 does not allow to modify files, each time you make a change you need to reupload the whole thing.
I think you might have better luck trying DynamoDB.
Regarding the post, I don't know what to think. The SQLite was banned that way because it supposed to be light, I feel like adding things like JSON is going away from that principle.
So from looking at the test, you can get JSON out of select queries now, not a full blown JSON type like PostgreSQL.
Did I mention everything is open source? There is a mini-hack here that will let you choose your platform and be up and running in ~20 minutes with what's basically the stem cell you're gonna be winning hackathons with now that you know.
Ps we couldn't have done it without SQLite as we started out using that for our storage engine. Now we are moving to ForestDB because it's more like the data structures we present in our API.
Nothing too spectacular and nothing you couldn't do with any decent library already, but some convenience.
Aren't they already too late to the party? I mean, there would have been tonnes of libraries which would do this given how popular SQLite is. Shouldn't they have left it to those libraries and stuck to investing on the core database thingy ( too vague but I hope you get what I mean ).
And what does "too late to the party" even mean? Who said the party ended or ever ends?