> however it's 1.2x to 4x slower than sqlite

No? Where are you getting those figures? It feels like you may have pulled that from the 125 and 400 us numbers?

> The simple way to fork a sqlite db is just to copy it, but if that is too slow you could use it with a copy on write filesystem, either something native, a FUSE filesystem, or build a sqlite VFS.

That wouldn’t really solve what dolt does though.

> and it's level of testing and validation will be nothing like sqlite.

They’re using the other dolt tests as well as the SQLite tests. Nothing will hit the level of real world testing SQLite does.

▲

WatchDog a day ago | parent [-]

> Where are you getting those figures?

https://www.dolthub.com/blog/2026-06-08-how-fast-is-doltlite...

▲

gunalx a day ago | parent | next [-]

God that had a lot of llm'isms. Couldnt get through it with all the repeats and info bloat.

	▲	alsetmusic 15 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Dunno if I'd have directly attributed the writing to LLMs had I not read this, but I wouldn't have opened the link otherwise. Holy crap, that reads just like the documentation / explainers that I have Claude write for future agents or to remind me what I had it do in the future.

▲

IanCal 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Ah yes so the 4x slower isn’t really a real world case and you’d have to explicitly measure yours - it’s not a fixed slowdown but depends on table size - and it’s for doing many many single inserts in a row, which you’d be batching either way.

	▲	Izkata 15 hours ago \| parent [-]
		That's probably why they gave a range in their original comment.