Live data from Hacker News

Limbo: A complete rewrite of SQLite in Rust

turso.tech

81–90 of 238 posts

Re: Limbo: A complete rewrite of SQLite in Rust

#81
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Will you release the code into the public domain, like SQLite?

absolutely not. We're not fans of public domain, which is one of the things that led us to create libSQL in the first place. It is MIT.

What's wrong with public domain?

Re: Limbo: A complete rewrite of SQLite in Rust

#82
post #60

The license is "Copyright 2024 the Limbo authors". How is that possible if Limbo is based on a rewrite? Do they claim a clean room implementation? It seems wise of SQLite to close down their test suite. That's a great idea I wish I had heard about earlier.

SQLite is in the public domain. It is perfectly legal to create a derivative works from a public domain project and license it however you want. It's not cool and kind of a dick move to put it under a more restrictive license, but it's legal.

Re: Limbo: A complete rewrite of SQLite in Rust

#83
post #5

I’ll take the faster c version anyday over the rust. How are those conditional if statements working for you all?

The benchmarks in the post indicate that Limbo is more performant than SQLite, not less.

Microbenchmarks are not particularly predictive of performance with real workloads. And there's just one microbenchmark claimed here.

Re: Limbo: A complete rewrite of SQLite in Rust

#84
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> The SQLite3 business model is that SQLite3 is open source This is going to sound pedantic, but SQLite is not Open Source. It's Public Domain. The distinction is subtle, but it is important.

Details if anyone is interested: https://opensource.org/blog/public-domain-is-not-open-source

[deleted]

Re: Limbo: A complete rewrite of SQLite in Rust

#86
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Related: https://old.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/1ha7uyi/memorysafe_pn... C libraries aren't automatically the fastest option, there's a lot of C code which has stagnated on the performance front but is still widely used because it's battle tested and known to be robust by C standards.

There's still an element of truth in the idea that C is going to be faster by default. There's simply a much lower bar to writing fast (and unsafe) C. Fast Rust demands considerably more thoughtfulness from the programmer (at least for me).

For very simple things C might be accidentally faster.

But C lacks many modern data structures, which are critical for performance on modern hardware and bigger input data.

Re: Limbo: A complete rewrite of SQLite in Rust

#87
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. At least according to the Open Source Initiative, public domain is not open source: https://opensource.org/blog/public-domain-is-not-open-source

Any definition of open source that doesn't include the public domain is out of touch with how real people use the words "open source" and is therefore useless. You can make up any definition you want, but if you insist on calling elephants "bananas", I'm not going to take you seriously

You should read the text, it's not about calling elephants bananas but real issues with software in the public domain

Re: Limbo: A complete rewrite of SQLite in Rust

#88
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. At least according to the Open Source Initiative, public domain is not open source: https://opensource.org/blog/public-domain-is-not-open-source

Any definition of open source that doesn't include the public domain is out of touch with how real people use the words "open source" and is therefore useless. You can make up any definition you want, but if you insist on calling elephants "bananas", I'm not going to take you seriously

The problem with your analogy is that open source has a definition. As does public domain. As do elephants and bananas.

In your analogy we're not the ones calling elephants bananas, you are. We want to keep calling one bananas and the other elephants. You are suggesting that since elephants are similar to bananas you can simply use either word.

Legally, Open Source and Public Domain are -very- different animals. Open Source comes eith a copyright, and a license (which has requirements), public domain does not.

Of course public domain and open source are both "shipped as source code". Then again so is a fair bit of proprietary software. That doesn't make it open source either.

Re: Limbo: A complete rewrite of SQLite in Rust

#89
post #71
post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public domain is a form of open source.

No. At least according to the Open Source Initiative, public domain is not open source: https://opensource.org/blog/public-domain-is-not-open-source

It is absolutely true that a work can be in the public domain and not have source available (or even contributable). But that doesn't really matter to most people. The question for most people is not whether something is open source, but whether they can copy and make use of a work without being held liable for copyright infringement. SQLite happens to be both public domain and open-source to an extent (i.e., source available).

Conversely, open source doesn't necessarily mean "free to use without encumbrance." There are many open-source licenses that forbid certain uses (e.g. Business Source License). On the other hand, a work in the public domain is free to be used by all without restriction.

A better analysis of open source vs. public domain would be in the form of a square, where one dimension would be the right to use the work, and the other dimension would be the ability to obtain and contribute source code.

Re: Limbo: A complete rewrite of SQLite in Rust

#90
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. At least according to the Open Source Initiative, public domain is not open source: https://opensource.org/blog/public-domain-is-not-open-source

Any definition of open source that doesn't include the public domain is out of touch with how real people use the words "open source" and is therefore useless. You can make up any definition you want, but if you insist on calling elephants "bananas", I'm not going to take you seriously

[deleted]
Post reply on HN