• RIGHT and FULL OUTER JOIN: LEFT OUTER JOIN is implemented, but not RIGHT OUTER JOIN or FULL OUTER JOIN.
• Complete ALTER TABLE support: Only the RENAME TABLE and ADD COLUMN variants of the ALTER TABLE command are supported. Other kinds of ALTER TABLE operations such as DROP COLUMN, ALTER COLUMN, ADD CONSTRAINT, and so forth are omitted.
• Complete trigger support: FOR EACH ROW triggers are supported but not FOR EACH STATEMENT triggers.
• Writing to VIEWs: VIEWs in SQLite are read-only. You may not execute a DELETE, INSERT, or UPDATE statement on a view. But you can create a trigger that fires on an attempt to DELETE, INSERT, or UPDATE a view and do what you need in the body of the trigger.
• GRANT and REVOKE: Since SQLite reads and writes an ordinary disk file, the only access permissions that can be applied are the normal file access permissions of the underlying operating system. The GRANT and REVOKE commands commonly found on client/server RDBMSes are not implemented because they would be meaningless for an embedded database engine.

(5) Can multiple applications or multiple instances of the same application access a single database file at the same time?

    Multiple processes can have the same database open at the same time. Multiple processes can be doing a SELECT at the same time. But only one process can be making changes to the database at any moment in time, however.

    SQLite uses reader/writer locks to control access to the database. (Under Win95/98/ME which lacks support for reader/writer locks, a probabilistic simulation is used instead.) But use caution: this locking mechanism might not work correctly if the database file is kept on an NFS filesystem. This is because fcntl() file locking is broken on many NFS implementations. You should avoid putting SQLite database files on NFS if multiple processes might try to access the file at the same time. On Windows, Microsoft's documentation says that locking may not work under FAT filesystems if you are not running the Share.exe daemon. People who have a lot of experience with Windows tell me that file locking of network files is very buggy and is not dependable. If what they say is true, sharing an SQLite database between two or more Windows machines might cause unexpected problems.

    We are aware of no other embedded SQL database engine that supports as much concurrency as SQLite. SQLite allows multiple processes to have the database file open at once, and for multiple processes to read the database at once. When any process wants to write, it must lock the entire database file for the duration of its update. But that normally only takes a few milliseconds. Other processes just wait on the writer to finish then continue about their business. Other embedded SQL database engines typically only allow a single process to connect to the database at once.

    However, client/server database engines (such as PostgreSQL, MySQL, or Oracle) usually support a higher level of concurrency and allow multiple processes to be writing to the same database at the same time. This is possible in a client/server database because there is always a single well-controlled server process available to coordinate access. If your application has a need for a lot of concurrency, then you should consider using a client/server database. But experience suggests that most applications need much less concurrency than their designers imagine.

    When SQLite tries to access a file that is locked by another process, the default behavior is to return SQLITE_BUSY. You can adjust this behavior from C code using the sqlite3_busy_handler() or sqlite3_busy_timeout() API functions.