Quack for DuckDB
Hacker ApprovedDatabase protocol in Developer tools
People recommend Quack for sharing a high-memory DuckDB server and its cache across a team, and for easing DuckDB's single-writer concurrency limit.
People recommend Quack for sharing a high-memory DuckDB server and its cache across a team, and for easing DuckDB's single-writer concurrency limit.
22 people gave an opinion
- recommend it
- 20
- criticize it
- 2
- approval share
- 91%
Recommended in 4 of 13 months
- November 2025: not recommended
- December 2025: not recommended
- January 2026: not recommended
- February 2026: not recommended
- March 2026: not recommended
- April 2026: not recommended
- May 2026: recommended
- June 2026: not recommended
- July 2026: recommended
- August 2026: recommended
- September 2026: not recommended
- October 2026: recommended
- November 2026: not recommended (month in progress)
Why it carries the badge
- 20 people recommend itNeeds 10 or more, met.
- 10 recommenders for every criticNeeds 2 to 1 or better, met.
- Recommended in 4 of 13 monthsNeeds 4 or more, met.
The same three rules apply to every product, and the badge can’t be bought. How the badge works
What people say about it
The reasons people give, with the number of comments that give each one. Open a reason to read what they said.
Why people recommend it
Each mark is one comment
Shared server and cache for teams
“The big benefit of this server protocol is sharing a high memory server and taking advantage of a shared cache for recent data.”
Comment from 12 May 2026 in “Quack: The DuckDB Client-Server Protocol” “Sounds useful for small-ball internal analytics datasets you want to place on shared team server.”
Comment from 12 May 2026 in “Quack: The DuckDB Client-Server Protocol” Eases single-writer concurrency limit
“The single-writer limit was always the awkward part. Quack finally addresses it.”
Comment from 18 Aug 2026 in “A Preview of DuckDB v2.0” “the sharp points around concurrency are relaxing”
Comment from 17 Aug 2026 in “A Preview of DuckDB v2.0” Strong option for DuckLake catalogs
“I think that Quack will become the primary option for a DuckLake catalog in the future”
Comment from 12 May 2026 in “Quack: The DuckDB Client-Server Protocol” “Seems like a DuckDB / Quack catalog would be an excellent alternative.”
Comment from 12 May 2026 in “Quack: The DuckDB Client-Server Protocol” “think duckdb/ducklake/quack could potentially be a future replacement”
Comment from 13 May 2026 in “Quack: The DuckDB Client-Server Protocol” Resolves problems encountered with DuckDB
“This perfectly solves that, along with several other similar kinds of problems I've encountered with duckdb.”
Comment from 13 May 2026 in “Quack: The DuckDB Client-Server Protocol” “Yes, Quack resolves this problem.”
Comment from 12 May 2026 in “Quack: The DuckDB Client-Server Protocol”
What people said
22 of the 25 comments that mention it, newest first. Each links to the original comment.
“think the Quack protocol opens up a lot of cool possibilities too”
“The single-writer limit was always the awkward part. Quack finally addresses it.”
“The Quack protocol also basically fixes this (though still in beta)”
“the sharp points around concurrency are relaxing”
“IMHO, options are to indirect through a daemon anyway (e.g. using Quack)”
“The Kitty-title fallback is clever.”
“It's not perfect, but for that specific use case it's pretty good.”
“it's a bit too much friction”
“Very hyped for this and updates.”
“think duckdb/ducklake/quack could potentially be a future replacement”
“it seems like one of the more compelling features”
“watch the video from the blog. There's a WASM demo at the end, which is great.”
“That is a pretty amazing feature.”
“This perfectly solves that, along with several other similar kinds of problems I've encountered with duckdb.”
“Can't wait to play with this!”
“Yes, Quack resolves this problem.”
“I think that Quack will become the primary option for a DuckLake catalog in the future”
“The big benefit of this server protocol is sharing a high memory server and taking advantage of a shared cache for recent data.”
“Seems like a DuckDB / Quack catalog would be an excellent alternative.”
“It is bad for large amount of data because you have timeout issues on some clients, you hit request/response size limits etc.”
“I'm a big fan of owning the protocol so you can optimize it to internal structures.”
“Sounds useful for small-ball internal analytics datasets you want to place on shared team server.”
Counts come from 1,795,640 Hacker News comments, November 2025 to November 2026. How we count. Report a mistake.