Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
43 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

Robert Smith
After spending some time trying various methods to optimize the performance of SQLite for an ARM-based application, I've come across a technology called DeviceSQL. The developers of DeviceSQL (Encirq) claim it has 5x the performance of SQLite and they are putting on a webinar on Dec. 13th to go into details.

http://seminar2.techonline.com/registration/distrib.cgi?s=1191&d=1700

I like SQLite, but has anyone tried or benchmarked DeviceSQL for an embedded application? Also, has anyone found a way to integrate a custom indexing methods into SQLite?

Thanks,
Robert
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

D. Richard Hipp
Robert Smith <[hidden email]> wrote:

> After spending some time trying various methods to optimize the performance
> of SQLite for an ARM-based application, I've come across a technology called
> DeviceSQL. The developers of DeviceSQL (Encirq) claim it has 5x the
> performance of SQLite and they are putting on a webinar on Dec. 13th to go
> into details.
>
> http://seminar2.techonline.com/registration/distrib.cgi?s=1191&d=1700
>
> I like SQLite, but has anyone tried or benchmarked DeviceSQL for an embedded
> application? Also, has anyone found a way to integrate a custom indexing
> methods into SQLite?
>

I've been trying to find out more about Encirq and DeviceSQL
for years.  They have a very agressive marketing organization
that plays fast and loose with the facts.  But other than this,
I haven't been able to learn much.  Various web searches turn
up nothing that isn't either written directly by Encirq or
at least ghost-written by Encirq.  I have never seen an
independent 3rd-party evaluation of their product.  If anybody
is really using it, they have choosen not to blog about it.

DeviceSQL is very different from SQLite.  It is not a
general-purpose SQL database engine.  From what I understand,
you enter SQL on your workstation.  DeviceSQL then generates
C-code that implements that SQL.  Then you compile the C-code
on your device.  If you database schema changes, you have to
regenerate the code and recompile your application.

BTW, Encirq used to purchase Google ads claiming that DeviceSQL
was 20x faster than SQLite.  I don't know why they reduced that
claim to 5x.

--
D. Richard Hipp <[hidden email]>


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to [hidden email]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

steveweick
This is Steve Weick, CTO & VP Engineering at Encirq Corp., developers and IP owners of DeviceSQL. I would like to address D. Richard Hipp’s statements.

RDH:"If you view their web presentation and/or try out Encirq's products, I would be very interested to hear your impressions. Even better would be if you could blog about it.Encirq has for years been running Google Adsense ads claiming to be 20x faster than SQLite. (Dunno why they have now reduced that claim to 5x faster.) But I have never yet seen an independent confirmation of this. Nor even have I been able
to find anybody who is actually using DeviceSQL in a product. Web searches turn up nothing but marketing literature coming directly or indirectly from Encirq. Some independent analysis (regardless of whether it is favorable or unfavorable to SQLite) would be appreciated."



SW: The DeviceSQL  performance advantage over SQLite has been demonstrated by running a series of benchmarks with a variety of operations using  Linux on PCs,  ARM, Freescale, and other processor platforms that are commonly used in embedded applications.

In all our benchmarking we attempt to present SQLite capabilities at their best. So we "tweak" SQLite to use indexes, not scans, in all cases. We also opt (for fairness) to compare the products using only paged storage with B-trees like those of SQLite. In many cases our other indexing techniques are far superior to this approach. We provide detailed benchmark reports as well as the benchmark code to prospective customers.

 We have seen that SQLite performance, while poor on larger PCs, degrades significantly on small processors compared with DeviceSQL. We believe that this is due to the fact that SQLite uses a number of techniques that consume large amounts of the available CPU capacity, and it is therefore unable to operate at the flash or disk speed. While SQLite performance has improved in some areas in the last few releases, we can still show that DeviceSQL is 2-10X faster in all of the interesting cases and 50X faster in one odd case.

You do not see client listings on our site because our clients believe that DeviceSQL is part of their competitive advantage and they do not like to advertise to their competition what they are using. You will however see outspoken users of DeviceSQL explain why they chose DeviceSQL over SQLite, if they were not able to make SQLite satisfy their requirements, like Gemstar-TV Guide.


RDH: "My understanding of DeviceSQL is:


* It is NOT transactional. There is no such thing as ROLLBACK."


SW: This is false. DeviceSQL DOES support transactions and ROLLBACK, just not in the traditional, resource intensive manner of maintaining a journaling log. Rather, we use a simple approach which maintains data integrity, high performance, and small footprint without introducing the possibility of corrupting the journal.



RDH:"* If you lose power during a write, your database is toast."


SW: Again, not true. DeviceSQL has supported transactions and rollback since its very first release in 2003 and continues to do so today. Contrary to Mr. Hipp's assertions, DeviceSQL ensures that writes complete successfully (ensuring no power outage can cause corruption) before continuing after a commit. In fact, because of DeviceSQL's novel (and very simple) commit approach, it is possible to prove that application data is recoverable (this is quite difficult to do with the logging approach used by SQLite and important for devices that must handle critically important data). In addition to fast updates, the DeviceSQL approach yields substantially shorter boot times after failures. This is often important to consumer devices where the end user will not tolerate long boot times.



RDH:"* If your database schema changes, you have to recompile your application."


SW: This is true. DeviceSQL is targeted for embedded applications where executables change rarely, so schema changes are a big deal, and the clients do not want to make changes to the schema after production begins. We do however, offer migration utilities and approaches for doing this if needed.


RDH:"* The database file format changes depending on the schema."


SW: Not sure what this statement is about, although all databases have this to some extent.


RDH:"* DeviceSQL is not a general-purpose database engine. You compile SQL statements into C code on a development workstation, then compile the C code for your embedded device."


SW: Neither is SQLite by this standard. Both products are application-resident database engines that live in the application's address space. The question is whether the main use model is compiled SQL versus interpreted SQL or C APIs. DeviceSQL also supports C query interfaces. This is rarely an issue in small devices where the database manager is embedded in the application, and where our compiled language can be used to implement  application database logic.


RDH:"I can imagine circumstances where the DeviceSQL approach, while much less flexible and forgiving than SQLite, might be a better way to go, depending on what you are trying to
do. But I have not gotten good vibes from Encirq as a company. And I have no idea how reliable the DeviceSQL product is. I would really appreciate your thoughts on that subject."


SW: Your opinion about DeviceSQL does not match what our clients say about DeviceSQL. Our product is commercial grade, developed and supported by an engineering Team with 100+ years of combined DBMS development expertise. DeviceSQL is highly reliable and has an outstanding record of QA with millions of units shipped to date. We have never been designed out of a customer product.


SW: Richard,  We have written to you directly before to ask you to stop the FUD and incorrect statements, and you have chosen to continue. I suggest you not waste everyone's time by circulating deliberately misleading information.

Steve Weick
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re[2]: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

Ion Silvestru
>SW: Richard,  We have written to you directly before to ask you to stop the
>FUD and incorrect statements, and you have chosen to continue. I suggest you
>not waste everyone's time by circulating deliberately misleading
>information.
I think you are very aggressive and I think you must apologise to, not
only Richard, but to us (just see previous messages about DeviceSQL,
full of suppositions).

These were no "FUD and incorrect statements", nor "misleading
information", these were only suppositions, and this is because it's
hard to find real technical information or specifications on DeviceSQL, only
marketing information. Maybe DeviceSQL is a good product, but absence
of real info and abundance of marketing make us think and suppose
various things (just see previous messages).

All of us are waiting for what Richard stated:
"If you view their web presentation and/or try out Encirq's
products, I would be very interested to hear your impressions.
Even better would be if you could blog about it."

Even better if all of us can have access to this web presentation, to
find out maybe more technical info about DeviceSQL.

Any way, thank you.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to [hidden email]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

D. Richard Hipp
Ion Silvestru <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >SW: Richard,  We have written to you directly before to ask you to stop the
> >FUD and incorrect statements, and you have chosen to continue. I suggest you
> >not waste everyone's time by circulating deliberately misleading
> >information.
>
> I think you are very aggressive and I think you must apologise to, not
> only Richard, but to us (just see previous messages about DeviceSQL,
> full of suppositions).
>

Thanks for posting, Ion.  I too found Steve's remarks to be
rather insolent.  But I was just going to let it go.  Seeing
your response was an encouragement to me since it shows me
that I am not the only one who feels that way.  Thanks!

Unfortunately, Steve Weick might not see your comment
since he appears to have unsubscribed from the mailing list
immediately after sending his inflammatory missive.

>
> These were no "FUD and incorrect statements", nor "misleading
> information", these were only suppositions, and this is because it's
> hard to find real technical information or specifications on DeviceSQL, only
> marketing information. Maybe DeviceSQL is a good product, but absence
> of real info and abundance of marketing make us think and suppose
> various things (just see previous messages).
>
> All of us are waiting for what Richard stated:
> "If you view their web presentation and/or try out Encirq's
> products, I would be very interested to hear your impressions.
> Even better would be if you could blog about it."
>
> Even better if all of us can have access to this web presentation, to
> find out maybe more technical info about DeviceSQL.
>
> Any way, thank you.
>

--
D. Richard Hipp <[hidden email]>


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to [hidden email]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

steveweick

D. Richard Hipp wrote
Ion Silvestru <silvestru@molddata.md> wrote:
> >SW: Richard,  We have written to you directly before to ask you to stop the
> >FUD and incorrect statements, and you have chosen to continue. I suggest you
> >not waste everyone's time by circulating deliberately misleading
> >information.
>
> I think you are very aggressive and I think you must apologise to, not
> only Richard, but to us (just see previous messages about DeviceSQL,
> full of suppositions).
>

Thanks for posting, Ion.  I too found Steve's remarks to be
rather insolent.  But I was just going to let it go.  Seeing
your response was an encouragement to me since it shows me
that I am not the only one who feels that way.  Thanks!

Unfortunately, Steve Weick might not see your comment
since he appears to have unsubscribed from the mailing list
immediately after sending his inflammatory missive.

>
> These were no "FUD and incorrect statements", nor "misleading
> information", these were only suppositions, and this is because it's
> hard to find real technical information or specifications on DeviceSQL, only
> marketing information. Maybe DeviceSQL is a good product, but absence
> of real info and abundance of marketing make us think and suppose
> various things (just see previous messages).
>
> All of us are waiting for what Richard stated:
> "If you view their web presentation and/or try out Encirq's
> products, I would be very interested to hear your impressions.
> Even better would be if you could blog about it."
>
> Even better if all of us can have access to this web presentation, to
> find out maybe more technical info about DeviceSQL.
>
> Any way, thank you.
>

--
D. Richard Hipp <drh@hwaci.com>


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to sqlite-users-unsubscribe@sqlite.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

steveweick
oops, I guess I need to get used to this message list protocol.

First let me apologize for letting Richard get me mad. Most of my friends would describe me as one of the most laid back people they know. Why am I mad you ask?

We wrote Richard back in August to correct his misstatements then. He chose to ignore the letter. Moreover he (or anyone) has been able to download our product with all of its documentation since February or March of this year. We encourage people to do so, because using the product is far more convincing and informative than trying to plow through a bunch of marketing blather.

By the way, I don't know where Richard got the stuff about me leaving the mailing list... it never happened.

Steve


steveweick wrote
D. Richard Hipp wrote
Ion Silvestru <silvestru@molddata.md> wrote:
> >SW: Richard,  We have written to you directly before to ask you to stop the
> >FUD and incorrect statements, and you have chosen to continue. I suggest you
> >not waste everyone's time by circulating deliberately misleading
> >information.
>
> I think you are very aggressive and I think you must apologise to, not
> only Richard, but to us (just see previous messages about DeviceSQL,
> full of suppositions).
>

Thanks for posting, Ion.  I too found Steve's remarks to be
rather insolent.  But I was just going to let it go.  Seeing
your response was an encouragement to me since it shows me
that I am not the only one who feels that way.  Thanks!

Unfortunately, Steve Weick might not see your comment
since he appears to have unsubscribed from the mailing list
immediately after sending his inflammatory missive.

>
> These were no "FUD and incorrect statements", nor "misleading
> information", these were only suppositions, and this is because it's
> hard to find real technical information or specifications on DeviceSQL, only
> marketing information. Maybe DeviceSQL is a good product, but absence
> of real info and abundance of marketing make us think and suppose
> various things (just see previous messages).
>
> All of us are waiting for what Richard stated:
> "If you view their web presentation and/or try out Encirq's
> products, I would be very interested to hear your impressions.
> Even better would be if you could blog about it."
>
> Even better if all of us can have access to this web presentation, to
> find out maybe more technical info about DeviceSQL.
>
> Any way, thank you.
>

--
D. Richard Hipp <drh@hwaci.com>


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to sqlite-users-unsubscribe@sqlite.org
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

D. Richard Hipp
In reply to this post by steveweick
steveweick <[hidden email]> wrote:
> D. Richard Hipp wrote:
> >
> > Unfortunately, Steve Weick might not see your comment
> > since he appears to have unsubscribed from the mailing list
> > immediately after sending his inflammatory missive.
> >

Hmmm...  Further digging prompted by the quoted surprise
reply shows Steve's post coming through nabble.com.  So
Steve didn't unsubscribe, he never subscribed in the first
place.  [hidden email] is on the mailing list, not
[hidden email].  And apparently Steve is viewing through
nabble.

Never heard of nabble.com before....  Good to know.

--
D. Richard Hipp <[hidden email]>


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to [hidden email]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

Samuel Neff
In reply to this post by steveweick
Steve,

I found the information you posted to be a good contrast and would love to
learn more, but you didn't include any technical details.  You said you have
atomic commits without a rollback journal and instead use some revolutionary
new way of doing commits.  You said DeviceSQL performs significantly faster
than SQLite, can you show what tests you ran, on what platforms, and your
exact results?  I was particularly skeptical when you said "SQLite
performance, while poor on larger PCs" because in our own testing we've
found SQLite to be 4 times faster than MSSQL after we migrated.  If you're
finding SQLite performance to be poor at all, then most likely your
developers are doing something wrong in testing SQLite which of course would
invalidate your comparison to DeviceSQL.

In short, can you provide more details?  Personally I don't install demo
software just to learn what I should be able to get from the company website
(which I would hope is truly technical details, not just marketing fluff).

I tried searching online for information about DeviceSQL but pretty much
everything I found was regurgitation of marketing data from your company.
The only really compelling thing I found was this.

http://www.google.com/trends?q=sqlite%2C+devicesql

Best regards,

Sam

-------------------------------------------
We're Hiring! Seeking a passionate developer to join our team building Flex
based products. Position is in the Washington D.C. metro area. If interested
contact [hidden email]
 
-----Original Message-----
From: steveweick [mailto:[hidden email]]
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 8:59 AM
To: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of
DeviceSQL?


oops, I guess I need to get used to this message list protocol.

First let me apologize for letting Richard get me mad. Most of my friends
would describe me as one of the most laid back people they know. Why am I
mad you ask?

We wrote Richard back in August to correct his misstatements then. He chose
to ignore the letter. Moreover he (or anyone) has been able to download our
product with all of its documentation since February or March of this year.
We encourage people to do so, because using the product is far more
convincing and informative than trying to plow through a bunch of marketing
blather.

By the way, I don't know where Richard got the stuff about me leaving the
mailing list... it never happened.

Steve



-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to [hidden email]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re[2]: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

Ion Silvestru
In reply to this post by steveweick
>We wrote Richard back in August to correct his misstatements then. He chose
>to ignore the letter.
August? We start to discuss about DeviceSQL some days ago, or
I am wrong?


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to [hidden email]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

D. Richard Hipp
Ion Silvestru <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >We wrote Richard back in August to correct his misstatements then. He chose
> >to ignore the letter.
>
> August? We start to discuss about DeviceSQL some days ago, or
> I am wrong?
>

I have several support customer in Europe who have been
visited by the Encirq sales rep there, trying to get them
to abandon SQLite in favor of DeviceSQL.  The way this
normally happens is that a sales talk is given to the
management.  Then the management goes to their engineers
asking for a comparison of DeviceSQL and SQLite.  The
engineers then come to me for help in defending SQLite.
I respond with a letter outlining the strengths and
weaknesses of each product as known to me.  I am always
very careful to outline the limitations of my knowledge
in these cases and to attempt to give as fair and as
balanced of a comparison as I can.

In one recent episode (prehaps the one that Steve is
referring to) my reply was forwarded to the Encirq sales
rep.  This provoked a vigorous response from Encirq in which
they attempted a point-by-point rebuttal of my letter.

Well, maybe it wasn't quite point-by-point.  They
did attempted to rebut every good thing I said about
SQLite and every bad thing I said about DeviceSQL,
But they let stand all of the limitations of SQLite
that I mentioned, as well as those factors I said
were favorable to DeviceSQL.

Did I ignore this letter?  Yes and no. I did read it. But
the overall impression I got from reading it was that the
customer can cure cancer and bring about world peace if
only they would switch to using DeviceSQL.  I tend to
discount such information heavily. So, I suppose Steve
is correct, in a manner of speaking, in saying that I
ignored the letter.

--
D. Richard Hipp <[hidden email]>


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to [hidden email]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

steveweick
In reply to this post by Samuel Neff
Hi Sam,

re your points below:

1. I think I said "innovative", not "revolutionary". The scheme involves using "dirty bits" rather than a log to record the transactional state of a page.

2. We plan on publishing all the details of the benchmarks in a few days. But to answer your question about platforms and tests, the tests were done using Windows XP SP2 and Linux FC5 on a 3GHz P4 with 1MB, Linux 2.4.31-a9-3 on a 200MHz ARM9 with 64MB, and Freescale Embedded Linux 2.6.16.11 on a 466 MHz 5200 with 256MB. The tests were done with relatively simple tables that ranged in size from 5000 to 1M records. Inserts, deletes, updates, and various selects were tested against the SQLite prepare/execute interface and the DeviceSQL compiled and interpreted interfaces.

3. I'm not surprised to hear that SQLite is substantially faster than MSSQL. We haven't tested MSSQL, but it makes sense, because both SQLite and DeviceSQL do not pay the MSSQL price of client server interfaces. That said, the real question comes down whether SQLite will meet your application performance needs.  If it does, great. By contrast, DeviceSQL customers have very stringent performance requirements (some even have a "performance budget") and often view performance as a critical element in achieving competitive advantage. If your application doesn't fit that mold, then SQLite is the right choice for you. SQLite performance is poor compared with that of DeviceSQL, not poor in general. Our customers have confirmed that  a number of times.

4. I'm not a big fan of DeviceSQL marketing to date either. I think that's going to change soon... watch this space.


Best regards,

Steve

<quote author="Samuel R. Neff">
Steve,

I found the information you posted to be a good contrast and would love to
learn more, but you didn't include any technical details.  You said you have
atomic commits without a rollback journal and instead use some revolutionary
new way of doing commits.  You said DeviceSQL performs significantly faster
than SQLite, can you show what tests you ran, on what platforms, and your
exact results?  I was particularly skeptical when you said "SQLite
performance, while poor on larger PCs" because in our own testing we've
found SQLite to be 4 times faster than MSSQL after we migrated.  If you're
finding SQLite performance to be poor at all, then most likely your
developers are doing something wrong in testing SQLite which of course would
invalidate your comparison to DeviceSQL.

In short, can you provide more details?  Personally I don't install demo
software just to learn what I should be able to get from the company website
(which I would hope is truly technical details, not just marketing fluff).

I tried searching online for information about DeviceSQL but pretty much
everything I found was regurgitation of marketing data from your company.
The only really compelling thing I found was this.

http://www.google.com/trends?q=sqlite%2C+devicesql

Best regards,

Sam

-
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

John Stanton-3
In reply to this post by D. Richard Hipp
[hidden email] wrote:

> Ion Silvestru <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> SW: Richard,  We have written to you directly before to ask you to stop the
>>> FUD and incorrect statements, and you have chosen to continue. I suggest you
>>> not waste everyone's time by circulating deliberately misleading
>>> information.
>> I think you are very aggressive and I think you must apologise to, not
>> only Richard, but to us (just see previous messages about DeviceSQL,
>> full of suppositions).
>>
>
> Thanks for posting, Ion.  I too found Steve's remarks to be
> rather insolent.  But I was just going to let it go.  Seeing
> your response was an encouragement to me since it shows me
> that I am not the only one who feels that way.  Thanks!
>
> Unfortunately, Steve Weick might not see your comment
> since he appears to have unsubscribed from the mailing list
> immediately after sending his inflammatory missive.
>
>> These were no "FUD and incorrect statements", nor "misleading
>> information", these were only suppositions, and this is because it's
>> hard to find real technical information or specifications on DeviceSQL, only
>> marketing information. Maybe DeviceSQL is a good product, but absence
>> of real info and abundance of marketing make us think and suppose
>> various things (just see previous messages).
>>
>> All of us are waiting for what Richard stated:
>> "If you view their web presentation and/or try out Encirq's
>> products, I would be very interested to hear your impressions.
>> Even better would be if you could blog about it."
>>
>> Even better if all of us can have access to this web presentation, to
>> find out maybe more technical info about DeviceSQL.
>>
>> Any way, thank you.
>>
>
> --
> D. Richard Hipp <[hidden email]>
>
Methinks he doth protest too much.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to [hidden email]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

Dennis Cote
In reply to this post by steveweick
steveweick wrote:
> the tests were done
> using Windows XP SP2 and Linux FC5 on a 3GHz P4 with 1MB
>  

That must be very slow. ;-)

I'm sure you meant 1GB for windows XP.

Dennis Cote

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to [hidden email]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

steveweick

oops, fingers are moving faster than the brain :-)  of course, you are right,
Dennis.

Steve

Dennis Cote wrote:

>
> steveweick wrote:
>> the tests were done
>> using Windows XP SP2 and Linux FC5 on a 3GHz P4 with 1MB
>>  
>
> That must be very slow. ;-)
>
> I'm sure you meant 1GB for windows XP.
>
> Dennis Cote
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, send email to [hidden email]
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>

--
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Improving-performance-of-SQLite.-Anyone-heard-of-DeviceSQL--tp14280006p14325082.html
Sent from the SQLite mailing list archive at Nabble.com.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to [hidden email]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

Lynn Fredricks
In reply to this post by D. Richard Hipp
> > August? We start to discuss about DeviceSQL some days ago, or I am
> > wrong?
> >
>
> I have several support customer in Europe who have been
> visited by the Encirq sales rep there, trying to get them to
> abandon SQLite in favor of DeviceSQL.  The way this normally
> happens is that a sales talk is given to the management.  
> Then the management goes to their engineers asking for a
> comparison of DeviceSQL and SQLite.  The engineers then come
> to me for help in defending SQLite.
> I respond with a letter outlining the strengths and
> weaknesses of each product as known to me.  I am always very
> careful to outline the limitations of my knowledge in these
> cases and to attempt to give as fair and as balanced of a
> comparison as I can.
>
> In one recent episode (prehaps the one that Steve is
> referring to) my reply was forwarded to the Encirq sales rep.
>  This provoked a vigorous response from Encirq in which they
> attempted a point-by-point rebuttal of my letter.

While Im not in the habit of defending the competition, Id like to toss my
2-cents in on this. I don't know anything about DeviceSQL but their
presentation is enough to get my respect :-)

The database market is very mature and if you do not have a set of special
features (in the actual engineering of the product, deployment or in its
licensing) that is compeling to a certain customer segment, you are dead
meat. Understanding those compeling reasons is one part engineering and one
part management. Engineering should understand technical
limitations/advantages and needs to be able to convey them convincingly to
management to the best of their understanding of product strategy. Likewise
management also makes decisions not always based on engineers understanding
or lack of understanding of the direction of the business (let along execs
jockeying against each other ;-)). And no matter how you couch or caveat a
statement, one isnt always present to know that those caveats are also
passed along  -  you may get little difference out the other end between
"God told me..." and "I witnessed it myself."

It seems to me that if the engineers are coming to you to defend their
selection of SQLite, then they didnt know SQLite as well as they should
because - it seems they havent made a very informed choice for using SQLite
(or any db) to begin with. The informed one might not be with the company
any more. But if a sales guy from DeviceSQL can pinpoint the needs of an
organization better than its own engineers, then its even worse (or better
if you are the DeviceSQL sales rep!).

Are you sure your customer is in Europe and not the US federal government?
:-)

Best regards,

Lynn Fredricks
President
Paradigma Software
http://www.paradigmasoft.com

Valentina SQL Server: The Ultra-fast, Royalty Free Database Server







-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to [hidden email]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

D. Richard Hipp
"Lynn Fredricks" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I don't know anything about DeviceSQL but their
> presentation is enough to get my respect :-)
>
[...]
>
> It seems to me that if the engineers are coming to you to defend their
> selection of SQLite, then they didnt know SQLite as well as they should....

This scenario has played out multiple times.  

Say what you want about DeviceSQL the product, but
one thing is undeniable: their sales presentations
are top-notch.  The first remark of yours that I
quoted above shows this to be the case.

But impressive sales talks do not necessarily translate
into impressive products.  In fact, a management-oriented
sales presentation, such as provided by Encirq, can be
a put-off for technical people.  The engineers and
programmers I normally deal with are much more
attracted to the droll, just-the-facts type of product
that they see and get with SQLite.  Flashly sales
talks that are low in technical detail, such as
those offered in the past by Encirq (I haven't seen
the "webinar") tend to frighten many technical people.

When engineers contacted me with help in defending
SQLite, it was not because they didn't understand
SQLite.  It was because they recognized that their
management did not understand SQLite, and that they
had no hope of communicating as effectively as the
Encirq sales team, and that they were desparate for
any kind of help they could get.  Sadly, they got
little help from me since I, like they, am hopelessly
outclassed by the Encirq sales people when it comes
to giving impressive talks.  On no occasion have I
told the engineers anything they didn't already know,
though I might have helped them to organize their
thoughts a little.

--
D. Richard Hipp <[hidden email]>


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to [hidden email]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

Lynn Fredricks
> This scenario has played out multiple times.  
>
> Say what you want about DeviceSQL the product, but one thing
> is undeniable: their sales presentations are top-notch.  The
> first remark of yours that I quoted above shows this to be the case.

Yes - but a company that sells technical products has to also do that, too.

> But impressive sales talks do not necessarily translate into
> impressive products.  In fact, a management-oriented sales
> presentation, such as provided by Encirq, can be a put-off
> for technical people.  The engineers and programmers I
> normally deal with are much more attracted to the droll,
> just-the-facts type of product that they see and get with
> SQLite.  Flashly sales talks that are low in technical
> detail, such as those offered in the past by Encirq (I
> haven't seen the "webinar") tend to frighten many technical people.

That's true. A lot of those kinds of sales presentations are correctly
targeted at decision makers that make financial decisions. I don't consider
it a bad thing - it's really a necessity to be competitive. The bear in the
woods isnt evil, he's just hungry like the other bears :-)

> When engineers contacted me with help in defending SQLite, it
> was not because they didn't understand SQLite.  It was
> because they recognized that their management did not
> understand SQLite, and that they had no hope of communicating
> as effectively as the Encirq sales team, and that they were
> desparate for any kind of help they could get.  Sadly, they
> got little help from me since I, like they, am hopelessly
> outclassed by the Encirq sales people when it comes to giving
> impressive talks.  On no occasion have I told the engineers
> anything they didn't already know, though I might have helped
> them to organize their thoughts a little.

I think what you are seeing is evolution of the software industry. It really
isnt necessary for there to be such an extreme split between engineering and
management  - and by evolution I mean that engineering has to adapt to a
tighter relationship with management, or they are destined to have their
roles outsourced. Noone should know the product than its own engineers, and
its those who can bridge that divide that will be running the engineering
and IT departments.

Best regards,

Lynn Fredricks
President
Paradigma Software
http://www.paradigmasoft.com

Valentina SQL Server: The Ultra-fast, Royalty Free Database Server







-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to [hidden email]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

D. Richard Hipp

On Dec 14, 2007, at 9:24 PM, Lynn Fredricks wrote:

> That's true. A lot of those kinds of sales presentations are correctly
> targeted at decision makers that make financial decisions. I don't  
> consider
> it a bad thing - it's really a necessity to be competitive.
>

My intent is  to provide complete detailed technical information
about SQLite, including its limitations and faults, and honest
comparisons and even recommendations of other products
(including, but not limited to DeviceSQL).  My intent is to avoid
sophistry, misrepresentation, exaggeration,  and hype.
This intent is sometimes imperfectly executed, but it is my goal.

If that means that SQLite is uncompetitive, then so be it.


D. Richard Hipp
[hidden email]




-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to [hidden email]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of DeviceSQL?

Fred Williams
This discussion reminds me of another long, long ago in a galaxy far,
far away. (When I worked on "Mainframes" with 32 K or less "core"
memory.)

Discussing the then lopsided world with my non-IBM salesman, in a local
watering hole, after a particularly trying day of dealing with
"management."  The topic was the state of the computer industry at that
time. (And yet today.)

I was complaining of managements' complete lack of ability to see the
superior to IBM technology, (IMHO) and cost effectiveness we had
installed.  That is when I learned of the non bits and bytes "real
world."  My late salesman friend said,  "Fred, don't you understand that
the computer industry is a Marketing industry based on technology, and
not a technology industry?"

Thirty years later nothing could be truer.  No matter how much things
change, they still stay the same...

Fred

Running Windoze XXXX on a "PC".
I know, I know it should be Linux on a Mac.  But I live in the "real
world" today.
I rest my case.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: D. Richard Hipp [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 7:04 AM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [sqlite] Improving performance of SQLite. Anyone heard of
> DeviceSQL?
>
>
>
> On Dec 14, 2007, at 9:24 PM, Lynn Fredricks wrote:
>
> > That's true. A lot of those kinds of sales presentations
> are correctly
> > targeted at decision makers that make financial decisions. I don't
> > consider
> > it a bad thing - it's really a necessity to be competitive.
> >
>
> My intent is  to provide complete detailed technical information
> about SQLite, including its limitations and faults, and honest
> comparisons and even recommendations of other products
> (including, but not limited to DeviceSQL).  My intent is to avoid
> sophistry, misrepresentation, exaggeration,  and hype.
> This intent is sometimes imperfectly executed, but it is my goal.
>
> If that means that SQLite is uncompetitive, then so be it.
>
>
> D. Richard Hipp
> [hidden email]
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------
> To unsubscribe, send email to [hidden email]
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------------
>


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, send email to [hidden email]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

123