Comment by skybrian

5 hours ago

I wonder how terrible would it be to use DuckDB as the main database (running transactions) for a small project?

5 comments

skybrian

Reply
throwawaythekey  4 hours ago

You might be able to make transactions work but it's really the opposite of what duckdb is designed for. Do it only for fun.

netcraft  5 hours ago

As long as its a single writer, you can get pretty far

  • dbettin  4 hours ago

    "if you have worked with analytical systems in the past, you may assume that DuckDB cannot handle transactional workloads. But DuckDB has been built as a transactional, multi-connection database with full MVCC and transaction isolation since day one. Most users just never needed that in a single-user scenario. It turns out DuckDB handles transactions well: it's fast enough to compete with general-purpose databases like PostgreSQL on quite a few workloads, and the client/server pattern finally lets that machinery shine in multi-tenant, long-running deployments."

    https://duckdb.org/2026/08/17/duckdb-20-highlights

    • andyferris  41 minutes ago

      Does anyone have any links to benchmarks or stories of attempting this in practice? (Even what their internal benchmark that lead them to say "it's fast enough to compete with general-purpose databases like PostgreSQL on quite a few workloads" was?)