Ben Johnson
Ben Johnson
> My initial thought would be this would be implemented as an extension of the http proxy already running in LiteFS, is there a reason a language-specific driver would be...
It'll be part of the LiteFS HTTP server that currently runs on port 20202. It'll look something like: ``` POST /db/query?name=my.db ``` Request body: ```json { "query": "SELECT foo, bar,...
The actual driver code itself should have the same API as a normal database driver. It should hopefully feel the same except you'll change the driver name & it'll have...
Yeah, it's just an HTTP endpoint. Maybe "driver" is a bad word for it. In Go, there's typically a database driver that's abstracted by the generic `database/sql` interface. Ruby has...
@markuswustenberg We have write forwarding in v0.4.0, however, it has some downsides that are more "distributed systems" related rather than LiteFS related. The problem is that starting a transaction remotely...
> So I guess the biggest difference is that for the HTTP query API, I can't have some logic decide what to do depending on which state is in the...
Thanks, @glommer. I read the spec before but I can't seem to find it now. Do you have the link by chance? My one concern with the API was that...
Yeah, I'm all for not reinventing the wheel. Thanks for the links! I'll take a look at them. I don't see any reason we can't use that protocol.
That looks better after that file removal. I'm not sure why that happened. I have some docs to push up around the v0.4.0 changes tomorrow too. I'm glad it went...
I'll see if I can reproduce that tomorrow.