Thanks for pointing that out. I was not aware libuv provides facilities for running code in separate threads, since I haven't seen it actually used in any of the of native addons I've looked at yet. It's too bad that node-sqlite doesn't use it.

I retract my comment about "no matter what", but it still just boils down to running sqlite on a separate thread. In my opinion it's probably a lot easier to run sqlite in a separate thread (or process) yourself at the app-level. The code for writing async native bindings in node is very complicated (not even considering the thread pool), and you probably don't need every single operation to be async. That just adds a lot of overhead, when you probably just need a higher-level layer that says "execute these queries on the sqlite process and give me the results".

You don't just get the threadpool by default when you write a native add-on. The native add-on needs to opt into the behavior. I can't find a single place in this source code where they're using the threadpool to schedule synchronous code to run in a separate thread.

Indeed, you have to write your native code to use it. My point is that you can probably write an even better sqlite library by using the thread pool, and that sync APIs can be made to act async.

The fear is justified that somebody would naively use this library on a network-heavy app and block the event loop. The readme should probably do a better job describing how this should be used. It's not too hard to run it in a separate process and create a "db service" that you query async. For many small apps or certain use cases the sync api shouldn't be a problem.

Actually, it does mean a synchronous API will block the event loop. Look at the signatures of the worker pool examples.

What that article is saying is that libuv exposes a thread pool that you can opt in to with a native extension instead of bringing your own.

It doesn't mean a synchronous API won't block.

What signatures are you referring to? They all take async callbacks.

Yes, and that's not an synchronous API.

For example, https://nodejs.org/api/crypto.html#crypto_crypto_randombytes... without the callback blocks.

You said "Just because SQLite's API is synchronous does not mean that it must block the node process." I'm saying that's not true.

A function might use threads behind the scenes, but if you're going to synchronously wait for it, you're blocking the event loop.

The OP and I are talking about the C API, not the node.js API, being sync.

No you weren't. Look at your first comment. You're literally relating sync in the C API with Node's API.

My first post was talking about the C API. A sync C API can be made into an async node.js API using the thread pool. That's what node does internally for DNS resolution, fs and other APIs.