top | item 23716357 (no title) waltpad | 5 years ago I think that, oddly enough, the point of that project is to use the JSON format as the DB storage format, not as an export option. Just from the look of it (I don't know either projects), LokiJS will very likely be always faster. discuss order hn newest slantyyz|5 years ago Sorry for the confusion, by "save as", I didn't mean export.LokiJS has multiple persistence options, with JSON files in the filesystem being just one of them.Alternatively, you could also just use it in-memory or with IndexedDB. waltpad|5 years ago Oh, I understand. I suppose it makes sense, if for instance one needs to store a bunch of parameters somewhere, it might as well be a JSON file.
slantyyz|5 years ago Sorry for the confusion, by "save as", I didn't mean export.LokiJS has multiple persistence options, with JSON files in the filesystem being just one of them.Alternatively, you could also just use it in-memory or with IndexedDB. waltpad|5 years ago Oh, I understand. I suppose it makes sense, if for instance one needs to store a bunch of parameters somewhere, it might as well be a JSON file.
waltpad|5 years ago Oh, I understand. I suppose it makes sense, if for instance one needs to store a bunch of parameters somewhere, it might as well be a JSON file.
slantyyz|5 years ago
LokiJS has multiple persistence options, with JSON files in the filesystem being just one of them.
Alternatively, you could also just use it in-memory or with IndexedDB.
waltpad|5 years ago