• 𝒍𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒏@lemmy.one
    ·
    1 year ago

    Ah, good ol' Microsoft Office. Taken advantage of their documents being a renamed .zip format to send forbidden attachments to myself via email lol

    On the flip side, there's stuff like the Audacity app, that saves each audio project as an SQLite database 😳

    • Hexagon@feddit.it
      ·
      1 year ago

      Also .jar files. And good ol' winamp skins. And CBZ comics. And EPUB books. And Mozilla extensions. And APK apps. And...

    • beeb@lemm.ee
      ·
      1 year ago

      an SQLite database

      Genius! Why bother importing and exporting

    • mogoh@lemmy.ml
      ·
      1 year ago

      that saves each audio project as an SQLite database 😳

      Is this a problem? I thought this would be a normal use case for SQLite.

      • fiah@discuss.tchncs.de
        ·
        1 year ago

        doesn't sqlite explicitly encourage this? I recall claims about storing blobs in a sqlite db having better performance than trying to do your own file operations

        • MNByChoice@midwest.social
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Thanks for the hint. I had to look that up. (The linked page is worth a read and has lots of details and caveats.)

          The scope is narrow, and well documented. Be very wary of over generalizing.

          The measurements in this article were made during the week of 2017-06-05 using a version of SQLite in between 3.19.2 and 3.20.0. You may expect future versions of SQLite to perform even better.

          https://www.sqlite.org/fasterthanfs.html

          SQLite reads and writes small blobs (for example, thumbnail images) 35% faster¹ than the same blobs can be read from or written to individual files on disk using fread() or fwrite().

          Furthermore, a single SQLite database holding 10-kilobyte blobs uses about 20% less disk space than storing the blobs in individual files.)

          Edit 5: consolidated my edits.