HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
clockworklabs
SpacetimeDB
Rust2023–2026
clockworklabs / SpacetimeDB

SpacetimeDB

Development at the speed of light

15Distinct people
21Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
25.5KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Development at the speed of light

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use was verified in the last source check.

What people are saying

No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.

No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.

Also in these discussions

No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.

This week on Hacker News

Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 1:49:46 PM UTC.

No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.

Mentions over time

HN mentions by year21 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2023-08-09 14:49:53 UTC to 2026-10-13 22:58:44 UTC.

02468102023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 6 mentions; 3 submissions, 3 comments20232024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments20242025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 9 mentions; 4 submissions, 5 comments2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 6 mentions; 2 submissions, 4 comments. Incomplete calendar period.2026*

* An incomplete calendar period is marked with an outlined bar. Its count is not directly comparable with a full period.

Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.

View mention counts and date ranges
UTC ranges include their start and exclude their end. Select a period to filter the source evidence.
PeriodStart (UTC)End (exclusive, UTC)MentionsSubmissionsComments
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC633
20242024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20252025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC945
2026 (partial)2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2027-01-01 00:00:00 UTC624

What Hacker News says

21 sources
I concede that we do have a big lock. But that is only because we did the alternative first and it performed worse, which is what OPs article is about. Reposting what I posted below regarding the strn.cat article: I'm a cofounder of SpacetimeDB (and the author of OPs article). The https://strn.cat/posts/spacetime/ article has several substantial errors. I've spoken with Vicent directly about them. Most notably, almost the entire commentary about durability is incorrect. SpacetimeDB does not acknowledge anything before data is fully persisted to disk, even though he claims it does. Clients CAN chose to listen before that, but you can do the same thing in Postgres if you want. There is no 50 ms delay to writing to disk. The article is mostly nonsense. Ask Claude yourself: https://github.com/clockworklabs/SpacetimeDB He spent 15 minutes look
Read the rest
ing at our code (by his own admission), having never written a database storage engine before AFAIK, and made a pronouncement that SpacetimeDB wasn't a good database. Crazy stuff.
In Ok, but does it scale?
I'm a cofounder of SpacetimeDB (and the author of OPs article). The https://strn.cat/posts/spacetime/ article has several substantial errors. I've spoken with Vicent directly about them. Most notably, almost the entire commentary about durability is incorrect. SpacetimeDB does not acknowledge anything before data is fully persisted to disk, even though he claims it does. Clients CAN chose to listen before that, but you can do the same thing in Postgres if you want. There is no 50 ms delay to writing to disk. The article is mostly nonsense. Ask Claude yourself: https://github.com/clockworklabs/SpacetimeDB He spent 15 minutes looking at our code (by his own admission), having never written a database storage engine before AFAIK, and made a pronouncement that SpacetimeDB wasn't a good database. Crazy stuff.
In Ok, but does it scale?
SpacetimeDB is open source[1], the open source version doesn't currently have all the features of maincloud, but most of those features are solely for scalability. I've done all of my work on my own local servers. I would even suggest paying for your own server up front until you're ready to scale out. I believe the 4 years is when the license changes to a more open license. And the scalability features on local are coming, they're just not here yet. [1] https://github.com/ClockworkLabs/SpacetimeDB
In SpacetimeDB

Showing the 15 most recent of 21 sources. Enable JavaScript to search and browse every indexed mention.

MAKE YOURSELF AT HOME

A few shortcuts

/
Search the collection
?
Open this guide
Esc
Close dialogs and navigation

Your saved repositories and interests stay in this browser.