Why does sqlite not suffer from the same risk?

cornstalks an hour ago | parent | next [-]

SQLite doesn’t depend on donations. They have a consortium, sell licenses (it is open source but some companies like the explicit CYA), sell support contracts, sell an aviation-grade test harness, and sell extensions.

Of course there is always the risk it goes out of business like any other company, but it’s not funded like your typical small open source project and doesn’t even allow open contributions (not necessarily a bad thing IMO but it’s just a totally different type of project).

	▲	rowanG077 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		pgbackrest also was part of an organization from what I understood from the post. The organization got acquired. I don't see how sqlite is shielded (or any project really). They could get acquired. They could not have enough customers. They could go the wrong directions and lose customers. They might have a few high profile bugs so that customers lose faith in them.

▲

doctoboggan an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Its an LLM comment, don't search too deeply for logical consistency

▲

Matl 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Because it's a single file you can back up like any other?

▲

rowanG077 2 hours ago | parent [-]

I interpreted it as the problem being that the technology may end up unsupported. I mean you can also keep using pgbackrest now. It's not like the code is gone.

	▲	Matl 25 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Well, yes, I meant that you don't need any 'special' tooling for Sqlite, whereas you do for pg.