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

Agentic AI systems violate the implicit assumptions of database design

arpitbhayani.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 115 posts

Re: Agentic AI systems violate the implicit assumptions of database design

#71

Post by cowlby »

nophunphil wrote: post #13
cowlby wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLM agents are unlocking demand and supply for applications that wouldn't have been possible before due to time constraints though. There's a growing demand for single user or smaller scoped apps where giving LLM agents direct access means velocity. The failure/rollback model is much easier with these as long as we have good backup hygiene.

1) Can you explain what demand and supply mean in this context? 2) In regards to having good backup hygiene, who is we ?

I think of all the pent up demand for proper applications that are just infeasible when it would take a developer weeks-to-months to create. Now it's just a few days with an LLM agent.

Examples for me are all the apps that live in a spreadsheet, or in a MS Access database. Or all the crappy ad backed apps on the iOS app store. People wipe full spreadsheets all the time and backups are the only recovery.

Just last weekend I was frustrated with the poor quality of Pokedex type apps that spam ads left and right. Took just one session with Claude Opus to roll a custom Pokedex. It knew internally about things like the PokeApi dataset, Pokemon data modelling etc. To-the-hour snapshots of the database are trivial for bespoke apps like this so the LLM agent velocity seems like an okay trade off for me.

Clearly people don't agree...

Re: Agentic AI systems violate the implicit assumptions of database design

#72

Post by m463 »

dherls wrote: post #2

Giving LLM agents direct, autonomous access to a real production databases with write access seems insane to me. NO ONE, agent or human, should have direct write access to production databases outside of emergency break glass scenarios. This is why we have stored routines and API layers to pre-define what writes are allowed. The facts that agents CAN autonomously write to a database does not imply that they should. F…

> autonomous access to a real production databases

remember that filesystems are just sophisticated databases

  rm -rf /

Re: Agentic AI systems violate the implicit assumptions of database design

#73

Post by cowlby »

antonvs wrote: post #7
cowlby wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLM agents are unlocking demand and supply for applications that wouldn't have been possible before due to time constraints though. There's a growing demand for single user or smaller scoped apps where giving LLM agents direct access means velocity. The failure/rollback model is much easier with these as long as we have good backup hygiene.

This makes no sense whatsoever. It's not news that if you just give all developers at a company write access to the production databases, owner permissions on all resources, etc. that velocity can be increased. But at what cost? The reason we don't do that in most cases is that "move fast and break things" only makes sense for trivial, non-critical applications that don't have any real importance, like Facebook.

There's thousands of small and medium business though. They have maybe one true CRM, and a dozen spreadsheets/files floating around that would benefit becoming proper apps. People delete spreadsheets all the time!

Sure don't give an LLM agent write access to the modeled CRM that took months/years to build.

But turning a spreadsheet into an app in a few days? By giving the LLM proper read/write capabilities for velocity? I think the case is there for it. Right tool for the right job.

Re: Agentic AI systems violate the implicit assumptions of database design

#74

Post by cowlby »

raincole wrote: post #30
cowlby wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLM agents are unlocking demand and supply for applications that wouldn't have been possible before due to time constraints though. There's a growing demand for single user or smaller scoped apps where giving LLM agents direct access means velocity. The failure/rollback model is much easier with these as long as we have good backup hygiene.

> single user If you're just vibe coding a tool for yourself, you don't have 'production database' at all even if you use database technology for storage. Just like many Android apps use local sqlite DBs but they're not production databases. Of course in this case no traditional wisdom about production databases matters to you. In other words, it's off-topic.

I commented this elsewhere: There's thousands of small and medium business though. They have maybe one true CRM, and a dozen spreadsheets/files floating around that would benefit becoming proper apps. People delete spreadsheets all the time!

Sure don't give an LLM agent write access to the modeled CRM that took months/years to build.

But turning a spreadsheet into an app in a few days? By giving the LLM proper read/write capabilities for velocity? I think the case is there for it. Right tool for the right job.

Re: Agentic AI systems violate the implicit assumptions of database design

#75

Post by cowlby »

argomo wrote: post #70
cowlby wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLM agents are unlocking demand and supply for applications that wouldn't have been possible before due to time constraints though. There's a growing demand for single user or smaller scoped apps where giving LLM agents direct access means velocity. The failure/rollback model is much easier with these as long as we have good backup hygiene.

I think a lot of the objections to your post could be answered by reminding folks of how Microsoft Access databases tend to pop up in small businesses as well as corporate environments outside of IT departments. Yes, they're not "proper" databases but they /get business done/ and often serve as v0 before a real app can be properly conceived of. One can easily imagine an LLM-enabled database that lets a wider audience…

Yes, that's the right framing. Millions flow through spreadsheets/CSVs/MS Access with none of the auth/backups/architecture people seem to be stuck to.

I saw an article on HN one time about CSVs and how much business still flows through them. Reminds me of the xkcd comic about the one tiny block propping up lots of infrastructure. It stuck with me because it's ripe area for LLM agent based upgrades.

Sure don't give LLMs access to the well architected blocks. But not wanting to improve the brittle areas seems crazy to me even if it's contrarian.

Re: Agentic AI systems violate the implicit assumptions of database design

#76

Post by cowlby »

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #36
throw5 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's a growing demand for single user or smaller scoped apps where giving LLM agents direct access means velocity. The failure/rollback model is much easier with these as long as we have good backup hygiene. This makes no sense to me. For anything that has sensitive payment or personally identifieable data, direct access to DB is potentially illegal. > The failure/rollback model is much easier with these as long…

This narrative seems to come from people who haven't worked on meaningfully complex software systems. They're more like script kiddies than software developers. I don't mean that in a derogatory manner. They're right that LLMs are unlocking new possibilities in the realm of their work. They just don't realize that these new possibilities are constrained to relatively simple applications, or very thin slices of comple…

That's the issue that I feel misses the forest for the trees. Relatively simple applications or thin slices exist right now, in production, in critical paths, as spreadsheets/CSVs/files on someone's desktop. That's the pent up demand I picture out there for developers.

Go to any SMB out there and there's a goldmine of processes that could be improved with LLM agents with full RW access to a database. Where backups are sufficient as a recovery mechanism that is better-than-before.

Re: Agentic AI systems violate the implicit assumptions of database design

#77

Post by gmuslera »

The contract is still there, the humans taking decisions at some layer are still there. Decisions were made, risks were dismissed, and that won't protect production data if some of those risks happen. A database won't survive a manager that starts hitting it with an actual hammer neither, or an agent with enough privileges decide to delete or corrupt all the data. And adding a mitigation like i.e. soft deletes is another way of dismissing the risks.

Re: Agentic AI systems violate the implicit assumptions of database design

#78

Post by cowlby »

2ndorderthought wrote: post #46
throw5 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There's a growing demand for single user or smaller scoped apps where giving LLM agents direct access means velocity. The failure/rollback model is much easier with these as long as we have good backup hygiene. This makes no sense to me. For anything that has sensitive payment or personally identifieable data, direct access to DB is potentially illegal. > The failure/rollback model is much easier with these as long…

You are thinking way too hard. This person is a hazard that needs to learn the hard way. If velocity means letting agents live edit a db, I'm fine being slow. Holy hell. Let these people crash and burn but definitely let me know the app name so I know never to use it first.

Not everything is a SaaS. I commented this elsewhere but I picture all the business running on spreadsheets/CSVs/MS Access databases on someone's desktop. People delete these all the time by accident. They have no security, no authentication, etc.

An LLM agent (with RW access to a DB), a developer, and a few days these become proper apps that SMB business would pay well for.

Sure don't give an LLM agent access to PII or properly built CRMs etc. But to not see the rest of the landscape seems like a missed opportunity.

Re: Agentic AI systems violate the implicit assumptions of database design

#79

Post by cowlby »

throw5 wrote: post #28
cowlby wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

LLM agents are unlocking demand and supply for applications that wouldn't have been possible before due to time constraints though. There's a growing demand for single user or smaller scoped apps where giving LLM agents direct access means velocity. The failure/rollback model is much easier with these as long as we have good backup hygiene.

> There's a growing demand for single user or smaller scoped apps where giving LLM agents direct access means velocity. The failure/rollback model is much easier with these as long as we have good backup hygiene. This makes no sense to me. For anything that has sensitive payment or personally identifieable data, direct access to DB is potentially illegal. > The failure/rollback model is much easier with these as long…

I'm not thinking of SaaS or properly built apps with an API, modeled databases, etc. I'm thinking spreadsheets/CSVs/MS Access that thousands of SMBs use to power their critical paths and someone accidentally deletes. Typically single user, maybe a small team. Infrequent writes, lots of reads.

Re: Agentic AI systems violate the implicit assumptions of database design

#80

Post by steve_adams_86 »

cowlby wrote: post #76
steve_adams_86 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This narrative seems to come from people who haven't worked on meaningfully complex software systems. They're more like script kiddies than software developers. I don't mean that in a derogatory manner. They're right that LLMs are unlocking new possibilities in the realm of their work. They just don't realize that these new possibilities are constrained to relatively simple applications, or very thin slices of comple…

That's the issue that I feel misses the forest for the trees. Relatively simple applications or thin slices exist right now, in production, in critical paths, as spreadsheets/CSVs/files on someone's desktop. That's the pent up demand I picture out there for developers. Go to any SMB out there and there's a goldmine of processes that could be improved with LLM agents with full RW access to a database. Where backups ar…

Okay, totally agree. I think good harnesses are crucial but the premise is absolutely valid.
Post reply on HN