Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: We open sourced our entire text-to-SQL product

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 147 posts

Re: Show HN: We open sourced our entire text-to-SQL product

#111

Post by tomhallett »

learnedbytes wrote: post #76
hackernewds wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand the "leave the code with them" part

I think they mean by open sourcing, they can take the code to a new startup without having IP legality issues.

Would open sourcing the core IP of a company “typically” require board approval?

If a company goes under, the investors will want to sell off the IP, open sourcing everything would make that IP less valueable. There must be some blanket clause in the term sheet to cover that, right? Ie: founders won’t do anything which will materially hurt the company without board approval (or something, I am no where close to a lawyer, this is all conjecture)

Re: Show HN: We open sourced our entire text-to-SQL product

#112

Post by PartiallyTyped »

jaynpatel wrote: post #103

Perhaps orthogonal problem - imagine you join a new company that has an enterprise product with hundreds of tables. Is there a way to connect Dataherald to my DB, and ask basic questions about the DB? E.g. "where are stored records related to X".

Dump the schema, create a document for each table, use LLM with rag?

Re: Show HN: We open sourced our entire text-to-SQL product

#113

Post by Kiro »

coder543 wrote: post #3

Have you considered enforcing a grammar on the LLM when it is generating SQL? This could ensure that it only generates syntactically valid SQL, including awareness of the valid set of field names and their types, and such. It would not be easy, by any means, but I believe it is theoretically possible.

That sounds overkill. It's usually enough to just tell the LLM to output valid SQL and it will adhere to the schema.

Re: Show HN: We open sourced our entire text-to-SQL product

#114

Post by yard2010 »

saigal wrote: post #108
badgersnake wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then you haven’t used it very much.

Yes totally agree. You can easily sniff out products that are simple wrap of GPT

Wouldn't a full featured OS GUI be a simple wrap of the command line? Would this make it less valuable to have?

Re: Show HN: We open sourced our entire text-to-SQL product

#115

Post by throwup238 »

tomhallett wrote: post #111
learnedbytes wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they mean by open sourcing, they can take the code to a new startup without having IP legality issues.

Would open sourcing the core IP of a company “typically” require board approval? If a company goes under, the investors will want to sell off the IP, open sourcing everything would make that IP less valueable. There must be some blanket clause in the term sheet to cover that, right? Ie: founders won’t do anything which will materially hurt the company without board approval (or something, I am no where close to a law…

If it mattered it would have become part of VC contracts years ago.

Early stage VCs make money on the big winners, not on the tail end of companies that don’t exit for 100x. For the most part, except for patents the IP is worth less than the Aeron chairs at the end.

Re: Show HN: We open sourced our entire text-to-SQL product

#116

Post by lelanthran »

threeseed wrote: post #89
boredemployee wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you wouldnt believe the amount of developers that don't know how to write sql

Because ORM libraries were invented 30 years ago. There is no requirement to learn SQL for most of the applications built today.

> Because ORM libraries were invented 30 years ago.

> There is no requirement to learn SQL for most of the applications built today.

In the same way that because Linked List libraries were invented 50 years ago, there is no requirement to learn what linked lists are for most of the applications built today?

You aren't getting past the requirement to learn relational databases "because ORM", and there is no material or course that teaches relational databases without teaching SQL.

The unfortunate result of this is that people who boast about knowing $ORM while not knowing SQL have never learned relational databases either.

Re: Show HN: We open sourced our entire text-to-SQL product

#118

Post by meekaaku »

threeseed wrote: post #89
boredemployee wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you wouldnt believe the amount of developers that don't know how to write sql

Because ORM libraries were invented 30 years ago. There is no requirement to learn SQL for most of the applications built today.

Most applications dont need to get data from a relational database. But for those apps that do, knowing SQL is pretty much a must have. The developer himself or someone on the team.

Re: Show HN: We open sourced our entire text-to-SQL product

#119

Post by edmundsauto »

saigal wrote: post #104
krawczstef wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

getting into enterprise is hard, so probably trying open source to help with that.

Enterprises are spending lots of time and money on this. The biggest issue that has slowed down sales cycle at this stage has been data governance. Most folks think it’s about accuracy or latency (which of course is an issue) but data governance can make this whole thing a non starter.

Can you explain more about why governance is the issue with a service like this? Companies not wanting their data to go off prem?

Re: Show HN: We open sourced our entire text-to-SQL product

#120

Post by saigal »

edmundsauto wrote: post #119
saigal wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Enterprises are spending lots of time and money on this. The biggest issue that has slowed down sales cycle at this stage has been data governance. Most folks think it’s about accuracy or latency (which of course is an issue) but data governance can make this whole thing a non starter.

Can you explain more about why governance is the issue with a service like this? Companies not wanting their data to go off prem?

yes. some want BYOC solutions. others don't want to even be perceived as being used to train an LLM. not to mention CCPA, GDPR, etc etc etc.

lots of questions around what data is being sent to the LLM, or just schema.

Post reply on HN