Live data from Hacker News

Launch HN: Ardent (YC P26) – Postgres sandboxes in seconds with zero migration

tryardent.com

11–20 of 61 posts

Re: Launch HN: Ardent (YC P26) – Postgres sandboxes in seconds with zero migration

#11
post #2

“Never impacts production data” is impossible to guarantee. Playing with real world data often has side effects outside of the database. For example if you store oauth tokens to external services in your DB (customer integrations) it’s easy to mess up your customers data through a bad API call (been there done that). There is still value in carefully testing on your prod DB, but for that you could just easily maintai…

One of the main things people use us for is ease of testing writes on a per dev/agent basis which would be difficult on a read replica!

On the real world data impact I absolutely agree. We added something called "branch hooks" which essentially let you define SQL to run against the branch before it's returned

This lets you essentially anonymize and modify the branch to scrub unintended external side effects.

It's something that we're still working on though and trying to design the right abstractions around because we want to get that part right.

Re: Launch HN: Ardent (YC P26) – Postgres sandboxes in seconds with zero migration

#12
post #10
post #3

Hi, site looks beautiful! How does this compare to managing our own read-only replica with anonymized data?

A true read replica won't let you write! So if you need to test something like a backfill and see if anything goes wrong you wouldn't be able to quite as easily. We'd let you instantly clone prod + user defined auto-anonymization so you can test writes. The architecture also somewhat takes the place of an existing read replica if you want to use it like that to make it more cost efficient. Also since we're using copy…

> A true read replica won't let you write!

I mean, they said "read-only" ...

Re: Launch HN: Ardent (YC P26) – Postgres sandboxes in seconds with zero migration

#13
post #6
post #4

How many people are giving an LLM Agent full read access to their production data? That seems nuts to me.

I'm much more worried about people who give full write access to their agents! But at least this solves that problem.

Jedberg... Wow an internet legend replied to me! >> I'm much more worried about people who give full write access to their agents! But at least this solves that problem.

Yeah it goes without saying that write access would be crazy... But, it seems like people don't really care about the fact that they are just giving their private data to companies like Anthropic, OpenAI and Google.

> Branch anonymization Branches default to a full copy of your production data.

Perhaps a data policy should be required to be in place before a branch can be cloned... The default configuration giving the LLM full prod data access by default, is a bad standard to set, I think.

Re: Launch HN: Ardent (YC P26) – Postgres sandboxes in seconds with zero migration

#14
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm much more worried about people who give full write access to their agents! But at least this solves that problem.

Jedberg... Wow an internet legend replied to me! > > I'm much more worried about people who give full write access to their agents! But at least this solves that problem. Yeah it goes without saying that write access would be crazy... But, it seems like people don't really care about the fact that they are just giving their private data to companies like Anthropic, OpenAI and Google. > Branch anonymization Branches d…

> Jedberg... Wow an internet legend replied to me!

Hey, I put on my pants the same way you do: by having my staff hold them up while I jump into them.

> But, it seems like people don't really care about the fact that they are just giving their private data to companies like Anthropic/Open AI and Google.

This isn't quite as risky as it seems. All of them have a TOS that says if you pay them enough money they won't train on your data. But you're right that there are probably a lot of people who aren't on those plans sharing private data.

> > Branch anonymization Branches default to a full copy of your production data. > Agreed, and I'm sure it will cause trouble if you don't also bring along with the copies the internal controls around access logging.

But also, for smaller companies, this isn't an issue since they don't have SOC2 and the other compliance needs yet. So it's probably a sane starting place for Ardent at this time. Most small startups let everyone in the company access the full database anyway.

> Perhaps a data policy should be required to be in place before a branch can be cloned... The default configuration giving the LLM full prod data access by default, is a bad standard to set, I think.

Or at least an easy way to copy it from the database you're branching from.

Re: Launch HN: Ardent (YC P26) – Postgres sandboxes in seconds with zero migration

#15
If you use xfs (+`file_copy_method=CLONE`) you can do this with Postgres 18.

`CREATE DATABASE clankerdb TEMPLATE sourcedb STRATEGY=FILE_COPY;`.

But Ardent can be useful for many, because cloud providers uses heavily restricted Postgres. And many use Aurora, which doesn't event let configure the `log_line_prefix`.

Though if cloud providers add file_copy_method=CLONE compatible managed pg ...

ref: https://boringsql.com/posts/instant-database-clones/

Re: Launch HN: Ardent (YC P26) – Postgres sandboxes in seconds with zero migration

#16
post #4

How many people are giving an LLM Agent full read access to their production data? That seems nuts to me.

Evan here, from Ardent.

It's not uncommon (Hex.ai, etc all do this, as do developers, MCP tools, etc). One thing we do at Ardent is enable obfuscated read replicas. We can strip PII in the replicas, so your agents are operating on very realistic (but not sensitive) data. Moreover, they can do so in a way that doesn't impact your production database and is fast enough to wire into your CI/CD processes.

Jeremy is correct, though. The main risk/concern is primarily agents with write access. There are two high profile instances in the last year of agents dropping production databases (even when, in one case, after being given explicit instructions to never do such a thing). While read-replicas of a primary DB solve the "agents can't destroy things" problem, they don't solve things like testing schema migrations (in particular) or updates to the data.

Re: Launch HN: Ardent (YC P26) – Postgres sandboxes in seconds with zero migration

#17
post #4

How many people are giving an LLM Agent full read access to their production data? That seems nuts to me.

Business side people install Claude, find it fantastic, read about postgres and BigQuery MCP, and immediately demand it.

Small enough company without suitable MoC and they've got a real chance of getting it.

Re: Launch HN: Ardent (YC P26) – Postgres sandboxes in seconds with zero migration

#18
post #4

How many people are giving an LLM Agent full read access to their production data? That seems nuts to me.

Evan here, from Ardent.

It's not uncommon (hex.ai, etc all do this, as do developers, MCP tools, etc). One thing we do at Ardent is enable obfuscated read replicas. We can strip PII in the replicas, so your agents are operating on realistic (but not sensitive) data. Moreover, they can do so in a way that doesn't impact your production database and is fast enough to wire into your CI/CD processes.

Jeremy is correct, though. The main risk/concern is primarily agents with write access. There are two high profile instances in the last year of agents dropping production databases (even when, in one case, after being given explicit instructions to never do such a thing). While read-replicas of a primary DB solve the "agents can't destroy things" problem, they don't solve things like testing schema migrations (in particular) or updates to the data.

Re: Launch HN: Ardent (YC P26) – Postgres sandboxes in seconds with zero migration

#20
post #2

“Never impacts production data” is impossible to guarantee. Playing with real world data often has side effects outside of the database. For example if you store oauth tokens to external services in your DB (customer integrations) it’s easy to mess up your customers data through a bad API call (been there done that). There is still value in carefully testing on your prod DB, but for that you could just easily maintai…

If it’s production data I probably don’t trust a random startup with it.

I’m very confused as to the target market here

Post reply on HN