Join the discussion
Write your take first — we'll ask for email only when you're ready to publish.
- Hacker News
- LatticeDB looks good, just curious how useful is duckpgqby srameshc
- duckpgq is great. I'd say the tl;dr is duckpgq if you have tables you want to traverse like a graph sometimes, latticedb when graph traversal is the primary mechanism of querying.
One of the motivating use cases for me was experimenting with agentic memory. I use latticedb as the backing data store. Finding related memories is traversing the graph (kind of like graph RAG).
by smiths1999 - Why don't just use ArcadeDB (https://arcadedb.com)? Its Graph OLAP makes graph queries faster than KuzuDB (LadybugDB now).by lvca
- Why not use something else? I wanted to build something from scratch.
What you've built with ArcadeDB is definitely impressive, but much larger scale that what I was trying to accomplish with this. Like the repo says, think sqlite but for graph dbs :)
by smiths1999 - I wonder about mapping RDF data (like Wikidata) to this. I guess the RDF predicate becomes the edge in your node-edge style of graph.by tomComb
- Wikidata doesn't imply RDF/SPARQL. Cypher works fine too. A columnar storage engine means you get indexes and the relational goodness for free.by adsharma
- Yes! This is something I've been thinking about quite a bit the past few weeks. We are going in this direction at work and I think graph storage is a natural way to think about this.by smiths1999
- Congrats this is really cool and love the examples
- Does it have something like litestream to backit up for specific production usecases (i.e. a single webserver is enough and downtime of a few mins is tolerable)?by itissid
- I am in the final stages of adding this based on your comment. Just wrapping up doc updates and will push a new release with hot copy functionality tonight!by smiths1999
- Nice, I’ll get it added to gdb-engines.comby cjlm
- very cool site!by smiths1999
- Thanks, that's a great list! Might be worth mentioning our engine there too, for people who want a graph database atop SQLite and other battle-tested relational databases like MySQL, MariaDB, Postgres.
My team and I built it over the years, and it's open source (AGPL). Here is how it works: https://community.qbix.com/t/qbix-streams-as-a-graph-databas...
Our database abstraction layer (and optional ORM) has been battle tested in production for millions of users, and has 3 adapters: Sqlite, Postgres, MySQL/MariaDB. And recently it even added vector search for ranking results by similarity: https://github.com/Qbix/Platform/tree/main/platform/classes/...
Documentation for the database layer is here: https://qbix.com/platform/guide/database
PS: If you do use a relational database for storing graph data, you're going to have a lot of duplication in some public keys. I highly recommend putting ZFS underneath, to help with deduplication. ZFS uses zstd, developed at facebook, and also can encrypt your data at rest (don't use the relational database to do the encryption, otherwise deduplication doesn't work).
by EGreg - Very nice - been looking for something that combined the flexibility of graph DBs like Neo4j with the simplicity and low cognitive overhead of SQLite. PErformance looks great too.
Excellent Readme - as well as the clear explanations and examples, very impressed by the 'when you should use it/when you should NOT' use it' section - sadly often missing on many worthy but unfriendly tools.
by anigbrowl - Thanks - appreciate the feedback! I wanted the README to be something you could quickly glance at, get a sense of the project and whether it's what you are looking for, and be done with it.by smiths1999
- I see "Claude" listed as a contributor. Could you describe how and how much? I'm keen to see how this looks in practise.
As for the tool, it scratches an itch I've been having, I'll give it a go soon.
by tescreal - I used claude extensively (as well as codex, I finding myself switching between the two every few months). How I used claude varied by the stage. I spent a lot of time initially going back and forth with claude on the idea, figuring out what exists, what would make this interesting, key features I wanted as a user and how to build something around that that made sense as a product.
The initial phases of building I would build out piece by piece. For example, building out the file system interactions I would have claude build a feature and explain how it worked in an educational manner (e.g., like it was a section in a book on latticedb internals). I would then read through the code. This was a great way to learn and build, simultaneously.
In the later stages, where the features and work was more complex, I would spend more time discussing, instructing, and verifying, but less time understanding the actual implementation. I'll give you an example. It's been a long time since I've handwritten SIMD code. I could try and review claudes output, but I am certain I'd miss any subtle bugs that may exist. I found it more productive to assume the code was right and focus on thinking about how I would verify that. Benchmarking, playing with latticedb, etc. were my primary tools for verifying the work. I could run a benchmark and see performance was great. Then I'd explore the test vectors and realize they were trivial, completely invalidating the benchmark results. So we would go back to the drawing board, create a new benchmark set, see results weren't great, and evaluate what was wrong with the implementation. Sometimes features would take days to get out just because of the iteration loop.
by smiths1999 - Thank you for sharing. I think the sqlite-esque local file approach makes sense for a lot of use cases.
What are some of the scales of the data you've been able to test this design on so far?
What was the most interesting part of designing it for you?
by vorpalhex - I did some perf benchmarking with 1M nodes but I'm mostly using it at smaller scales for another project exploring agentic memory.
Most interesting part is a tough one. From a learning perspective the beginning was incredibly interesting because I was spending a lot of time learning about how other DBs work. Even something as relatively simple as writing to disk had a lot more complexity to it than I initially anticipated.
I used LLMs extensively in building this, and the other interesting part was seeing how they failed. I've always been a proponent that tests are no guarantee of quality code, and working with LLMs has only reinforced it. They often write superficial tests. Sometimes a suite of tests would pass, but when I would actually play around with the feature it was clearly broken. LLMs certainly enabled me to build something of this scope, but it was far from "build a graph DB and notify me when you are done"
by smiths1999 - I measured this on a M4 mac mini (base model):
Very different from the comparison on github and the website.zig build sqlite-benchmark Medium (100K nodes) +----------------------+-----------+---------+---------+ | Workload | LatticeDB | SQLite | Speedup | +----------------------+-----------+---------+---------+ | 1-hop traversal | 5.7μs | 16.1μs | 2.8x | | 2-hop traversal | 30.1μs | 59.4μs | 2.0x | | 3-hop traversal | 171.1μs | 228.8μs | 1.3x | | Variable path (1..5) | 82.2μs | 5.8ms | 70.4x | +----------------------+-----------+---------+---------+Given that on-disk data structures are similar to SQLite, I expect the competition from other "graph on sqlite" projects when they co-opt the techniques in LatticeDB.
by adsharma - Thanks for sharing this. The lattice numbers are pretty close but my sqlite numbers are way off. I got a new computer since then so will remeasure.by smiths1999
- I'm a big fan of SQLite embedded nature, which allows for chaining multiple SQL calls with near-zero latency.
I'm currently building a personal knowledge graph server a mix of Notion's custom entities via JSON schema and Obsidian markdown+backlinked references. It's working well, but I suspect your product might be a better fit.
I do have one question regarding permissions: how would you recommend modeling a hierarchical access system in a graph database? Specifically, if a user is granted access to a document, they should automatically have access to all its child documents within that workspace. Is there a standard way to model this 'subtree' permission logic, or perhaps a more efficient approach you'd suggest?
Really impressed with the product good luck with it!
by k9294 - The permissions question is interesting. I think the answer depends on context. One approach would be to create some edge types `hasAccessTo` and `accessibleBy` that connect a user to a node. Then I'd create an edge type `childOf`. The rest is business logic. Permission checks can just traverse up to the first root node with permissions. The downside is this is all business logic, so can't really look at the database and understand this is how it works. Depending on the database you could create a function that returns permissions for any node, that encapsulates this logic.
Anyways, thanks for checking it out! Really appreciate it. Good luck with your project!
by smiths1999 - Modern authorization systems are often graph-based. Check out ReBAC and ABAC authorization models and also implementations like apache/casbin or authzed/spicedb. These schemas often have surprisingly simple graph definitions; I bet they could be replicated in LatticeDB without much trouble.by infogulch