3 ms·
The use case is local user DuckDB talking to MotherDuck for $. This is not commercially a terrible idea. Why keep paying Snowflake for bog-standard SQL query w
by twoodfin 5mo ago
The use case is local user DuckDB talking to MotherDuck for $.
This is not commercially a terrible idea. Why keep paying Snowflake for bog-standard SQL query workload when SF makes it easy to migrate to Iceberg & commodity engines like MotherDuck?
- szarnyasg 5mo agoHello, DuckDB DevRel here. Quack is independent from MotherDuck. MotherDuck has its own proprietary protocol, which has been around for years and it supports things like dual execution – see more here: https://duckdb.org/quack/faq#what-is-the-relationship-between-quack-and-motherduck https://duckdb.org/quack/faq#what-is-the-relationship-betwee... Of course, in the future MotherDuck can also support Quack, but this is not the only interesting use case for Quack.
- twoodfin 5mo agoSure! Not knocking the architecture: Building out peer-to-peer federation in place of client/server makes perfect sense for DuckDB. And I’m a big fan of owning the protocol so you can optimize it to internal structures. Just making the point that DuckDB is disruptive technology & what it’s most likely to disrupt.
- simlevesque 5mo agoMotherDuck is very expensive.
- dmkii 5mo agoCompared to what exactly? Snowflake? Hiring an engineer to deploy DuckDB? A hobby project? FWIW I work at MotherDuck so obviously biased, but curious to hear what makes you say that.