7 ms·

For those who can't wait for PG18 or need full instance isolation: I built Velo, which does instant branching using ZFS snapshots instead of reflinks. Works wi

• tobase 10mo ago
  [flagged]
• teiferer 10mo ago
  You mean you told Claude a bunch of details and it built it for you? Mind you, I'm not saying it's bad per se. But shouldn't we be open and honest about this? I wonder if this is the new normal. Somebody says "I built Xyz" but then you realize it's vibe coded.
  • earthnail 10mo ago
    Not sure why this is downvoted. For a critical tool like DB cloning, I‘d very much appreciate if it was hand written. Simply because it means it’s also hand reviewed at least once (by definition). We wouldn’t have called it reviewed in the old world, but in the AI coding world we’re now in it makes me realise that yes, it is a form of reviewing. I use Claude a lot btw. But I wouldn’t trust it on mission critical stuff.
    • deleted 10mo ago
      [deleted]
    • renewiltord 10mo ago
      If you don’t read code you execute someone is going to steal everything on your file system one day
    • ffsm8 10mo ago
      Eh, DB branching is mostly only necessary for testing - locally, in CI or quick rollbacks on a shared dev instance. Or at least I cannot come up with a usecase for prod. From that perspective, it feels like it'd be a perfect usecase to embrace the LLM guided development jank
      • notKilgoreTrout 10mo ago
        Mostly.. App migrations that may fail and need a rollback have the problem that you may not be allowed to wipe any transactions so you may want to be putting data to a parallel world that didn't migrate.
        • parthdesai 10mo ago
          > App migrations that may fail and need a rollback have the problem that you may not be allowed to wipe any transactions so you may want to be putting data to a parallel world that didn't migrate. This is why migrations are supposed to be backwards compatible
          • notKilgoreTrout 10mo ago
            https://github.com/flyway/flywaydb.org/blob/gh-pages/documentation/concepts/migrations.md#important-notes https://github.com/flyway/flywaydb.org/blob/gh-pages/documen... You can certainly bet you followed that advice correctly, now what are the odds you could test a what-if like that in sufficient depth?
            • deleted 9mo ago
              [deleted]
      • gavinray 10mo ago
        > Eh, DB branching is mostly only necessary for testing - locally For local DB's, when I break them, I stop the Docker image and wipe the volume mounts, then restart + apply the "migrations" folder (minus whatever new broken migration caused the issue).
    • dpedu 10mo ago
      It's being downvoted because the commenter is asking for something that is already in the readme. Furthermore, it's ironic that the person raising such an issue is performing the same mistake as they are calling out - neglecting to read something they didn't write.
      • earthnail 10mo ago
        It‘s at the very bottom of the readme, below the MIT license mention. Yes, it’s there, but very much in the fineprint. I think the easier thing to spot is the CLAUDE.md in the code (and in particular how comprehensive it is). Again, I love Claude, I use it a ton, but a topic like database cloning requires a certain rigour in my opinion. This repo does not seem to have it. If I had hired a consultant to build a tool like this and would receive this amount of vibe coding, I’d feel deceived. I wouldn’t trust it on my critical data.
        • rat9988 10mo ago
          >Yes, it’s there, but very much in the fineprint. This is where it belongs, at best. He doesn't even have to disclose it. Prompting so that the ai writes the code faster than you is okay.
  • dpedu 10mo ago
    Huh? It says so right in the README. https://github.com/elitan/velo/blame/12712e26b18d0935bfb6c6e8e78159c1ad1cbe6d/README.md#L627 https://github.com/elitan/velo/blame/12712e26b18d0935bfb6c6e... And are we really doing this? Do we need to admit how every line of code was produced? Why? Are you expecting to see "built with the influence of Stackoverflow answers" or "google searches" on every single piece of software ever? It's an exercise of pointlessness.
    • renewiltord 10mo ago
      I think you need to start with the following statement: > We would like to acknowledge the open source people, who are the traditional custodians of this code. We pay our respects to the stack overflow elders, past, present, and future, who call this place, the code and libraries that $program sits upon, their work. We are proud to continue their tradition of coming together and growing as a community. We thank the search engine for their stewardship and support, and we look forward to strengthening our ties as we continue our relationship of mutual respect and understanding Then if you would kindly say that a Brazilian invented the airplane that would be good too. If you don’t do this you should be cancelled for your heinous crime.
      • stronglikedan 10mo ago
        > a Brazilian invented the airplane lol, good one!
        • hu3 10mo ago
          wasn't it? last I checked, Wright brothers used a catapult while Santos-Dumont made a plane that took off by itself.
          • pbh101 10mo ago
            I think it was the Wright brothers taking off from level ground while Santos-Dumpont got something flying off a cliff earlier.
  • elAhmo 10mo ago
    It is the new normal, whether you are against it or not. If someone used AI, it is a good discussion to see whether they should explicitly disclose it, but people have been using assisted tools, from auto-complete, text expanders, IDE refactoring tools, for a while - and you wouldn't make a comment that they didn't build it. The lines are becoming more blurry over time, but it is ridiculous to claim that someone didn't build something if they used AI tools.
  • pritambarhate 10mo ago
    Let's say there is an architect and he also owns a construction company. This architect, then designs a building and gets it built from of his employees and contractors. In such cases the person says, I have built this building. People who found companies, say they have built companies. It's commonly accepted in our society. So even if Claude built for it for GP, as long as GP designed it, paid for tools (Claude) to build it, also tested it to make sure that it works, I personally think, he has right to say he has built it. If you don't like it, you are not required to use it.
    • greatgib 10mo ago
      The architect knows what it is doing. And the workers are professionals with supervisors to check that the work is done properly.
    • pebble 10mo ago
      No, it's more like the architect has a cousin who is like "I totally got this bro" and builds the building for them.
      • foobarbecue 10mo ago
        Right and also in this world there are no building codes or building inspections.
    • testdelacc1 10mo ago
      What an outrageously bad analogy. Everyone involved in that building put their professional reputations and licenses on the line. If that building collapses, the people involved will lose their livelihoods and be held criminally liable. Meanwhile this vibe coded nonsense is provided “AS IS”, WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED. We don’t even know if he read it before committing and pushing.
      • pritambarhate 10mo ago
        Even billion dollar software products have similar clauses, it doesn't have anything to do with vibe coding. To build and sell software no educational qualification is needed. Quality of the software comes from testing. Humans and LLMs both make mistakes while coding.
  • 6r17 10mo ago
    There was a recent wave of such comment on the rust subreddit - exactly in this shape "Oh you mean you built this with AI". This is highly toxic, lead to no discussion, and is literally drove by some dark thought from the commentator. I really hope HN will not jump on this bandwagon and will focus instead on creating cool stuff. Everybody in the industry is vibecoding right now - the things that stick are due to sufficient quality being pushed on it. Having a pessimistic / judgmental surface reaction to everything as being "ai slop" is not something that I'm going to look forward in my behavior.
    • heliumtera 10mo ago
      >This is highly toxic, lead to no discussion Why good faith is a requirement for commenting but not for submissions? I would argue the good faith assumption should be disproportionately more important for submissions given the 1 to many relationship. You're not lying, it indeed is toxic and rapidly spreading. I'm glad this is the case. Most came here for the discussion and enlightenment to be bombarded by heavily biased, low effort marketing bullshit. Presenting something that has no value to anyone besides the builder is the opposite of good faith. This submissions bury and neglect useful discussion, difficult to claim they are harmless and just not useful. Not everyone in the industry is vibe coding, that is simply not true. but that's not the point I want to make. You don't need to be defensive about your generative tools usage, it is ok to use whatever, nobody cares. Just be ready to maintain your position and defend your ideals. Nothing is more frustrating then giving honest attention to a problem, considering someone else perspective, to just then realize it was just words words words spewed by slop machine. Nobody would give a second thought if that was disclosed. You are responsible for your craft. The moment you delegate that responsibility into the thrash you belong. If the slop machine is so great, why in hell would I need you to ask it to help me? Nonsensical.
      • 6r17 10mo ago
        Your bias is that you think that because you can use a bike then my bike efforts are worthless. Considering that I often thrash out what I generate and I know I do not generate -> ship ; but have a quality process that validate my work by itself - the way I'm reaching my goals present no value to my public. The reason this discussion is pathetic, is that it shifts the discussion from the main topic (here it was a database implementation) - to abide by a reactionary emotive emulation with no grace or eloquence - that is mostly driven by pop culture at this point with a justification mostly shaping your ego. There is no point in putting yourself above someone else just to justify your behavior - in fact it only tells me what kind of person you were in the first place - and as I said, this is not the kind of attitude that i'm looking up to.
  • cstrahan 10mo ago
    Do you take issue with companies stating that they (the company) built something, instead of stating that their employees built something? Should the architects and senior developers disclaim any credit, because the majority of tickets were completed by junior and mid-level developers? Do you take issue with a CNC machinist stating that they made something, rather than stating that they did the CAD and CAM work but that it was the CNC machine that made the part? Non-zero delegation doesn’t mean that the person(s) doing the delegating have put zero effort into making something, so I don’t think that delegation makes it dishonest to say that you made something. But perhaps you disagree. Or, maybe you think the use of AI means that the person using AI isn’t putting any constructive effort into what was made — but then I’d say that you’re likely way overestimating the ability of LLMs.
    • teiferer 10mo ago
      Could we please avoid the strawmen? Nowhere have I claimed that they didn't put work into this. Nowhere did I say that delegation is bad. I'd like to encourage a discussion, but then please counter the opinion that I gave, not a made-up one that I neither stated nor actually hold.
      • eudoxus 9mo ago
        > You mean you told Claude a bunch of details and it built it for you? > Nowhere have I claimed that they didn't put work into this. There's some mental gymnastics. > please counter the opinion that I gave The reply your responding to did exactly that, and you just gave more snarky responses.
        • teiferer 9mo ago
          We all agree that crafting the right prompts (or however we call the CLAUDE.md instructions) is a lot of work, don't we? Of course they put work into this, it's a file of substantial size. And then Claude used it to build the thing. Where is a contradiction? I don't see the mental gymnastics, sorry.
  • taude 9mo ago
    why does it matter?
• whalesalad 10mo ago
  Hell yeah. I’ve been meaning to prototype this exact thing but with btrfs.
  • elitan 9mo ago
    interesting, you have a link?
• Rovanion 10mo ago
  You, is an interesting word to use given that you plagiarized it.
  • anonymars 10mo ago
    Do you have a link to the original?
  • wahnfrieden 10mo ago
    Please share the instant Postgres clones tool this copied! I'd love to try it
  • elitan 9mo ago
    Plagiarized from what? Happy to address if you can point to what you're referring to.
    • eudoxus 9mo ago
      I think they may be jumping on the "shit on AI assisted project" bandwagon. I am by no means reaching for ai tools at every turn, but to suggest its plagiarized is laughable. Don't worry about these trolls.
• 72deluxe 10mo ago
  Despite all of the complaints in other comments about the use of Claude Code, it looks interesting and I appreciated the video demo you put on the GitHub page.
  • buu700 9mo ago
    Agentic coding detractors: "If AI is so great, where all the thriving new open source projects to prove it?" Also agentic coding detractors: "How dare you use AI to help build a new open source project." I'm joking and haven't read the comments you're referring to, but whether or not AI was involved is irrelevant per se. If anyone finds themselves having a gut reaction to "AI", just mentally replace it with "an intern" or "a guy from Fiverr". Either way, the buck stops with whomever is taking ownership of the project. If the code/architecture is buggy or unsafe, call that out. If there's a specific reason to believe no one with sufficient expertise reviewed and signed off on the implementation, call that out. Otherwise, why complain that someone donated their time and expertise to give you something useful for free?
    • bicx 9mo ago
      For real. For someone to even understand why this tool is useful and functions as intended, they need to have some deeper understanding of software development. Who cares if the implementation was done with AI. With Claude Code, I rarely write code by hand these days, yet my brain hurts more than ever from all the actual problem solving I’m able to drill into with all the programming cruft out of the way. I did it by hand for 15 years, and I don’t feel bad at all for handing that part over.
      • QuercusMax 9mo ago
        A decade ago, a senior staff engineer at Google told me that he doesn't mind delegating the data-entry parts of his job to junior SWEs, so he can focus on higher-level problem solving. This is how I've been treating AI, except instead of assuming your junior SWE is generally sane and has some understand of what you're doing, you have to make sure you double check everything.
    • 9mo ago
• newusertoday 10mo ago
  thanks for sharing its interesting approach. I am not sure why people are complaining most of the software is written with the help of agents these days.
  • theturtletalks 10mo ago
    It’s rampant. Launch anything these days and it’s bombarded with “vibe-coded” comments. The issue of quality makes sense since it’s so easy to build these days, but when the product is open-source, these vibe coded comments make no sense. Users can literally go read the code or my favorite? Repomix it, pop it into AI Studio, and ask Gemini what this person has built, what value it brings, and does it solve the problem I have? For vibe coded proprietary apps, you can’t do that so the comments are sort of justified.
    • blibble 9mo ago
      gee I wonder why people don't want "AI" code anywhere near their single source of truth (database)
      • theturtletalks 9mo ago
        I'm not understanding. No one is saying put unverified code right next to your database. Maybe spin up a replica or mock database and test it there.
• anonzzzies 9mo ago
  Does it work with other dbs theoretically?