HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
dotmesh-io
dotmesh
Go2018–2021
dotmesh-io / dotmesh

dotmesh

dotmesh (dm) is like git for your data volumes (databases, files etc) in Docker and Kubernetes

3Distinct people
6Mentions
1Explicit recommenders
533GitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

dotmesh (dm) is like git for your data volumes (databases, files etc) in Docker and Kubernetes

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

What people are saying

I love your thinking, Ivan! We have an issue for this here: https://github.com/dotmesh-io/dotmesh/issues/85

lewq used a recommendation phrase. One indexed comment matches. This is a phrase match, not a verdict.

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, 3:03:16 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 year6 dated mentions

Observed mentions: 2018-02-08 13:25:05 UTC to 2021-02-22 01:40:09 UTC.

0122018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments20182019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 2 mentions; 0 submissions, 2 comments20192020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2021

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
20182018-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC202
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC101

What Hacker News says

6 sources
This is great, well done. While at (now defunct) Dotscience we did a lot of work on Dotmesh which you might find interesting: https://github.com/dotmesh-io/dotmesh I would also look at data science/ML as a potential use for the tool as there are real issues with using Git for training data. Last point which is more of a tip: Show don’t tell. If you did some side by side workflow walkthroughs showing the difficulties with other tools it will make it easier for people to see that this problem is real (which it definitely is)
In SnowFS – a fast, scalable version control file storage for graphic files
I agree that there should be open source solutions and the core of Dotscience is a project called Dotmesh (https://github.com/dotmesh-io/dotmesh) which is an open source wrapper around ZFS. You can see more info about how this works and integrates with Dotscience at https://dotscience.com/technology/. However I don't quite understand your point that "data versioning is not sufficient" because "I cannot roll back my datasets to a previous version". Surely data versioning would _solve_ the ability to roll your datasets back to a previous version? Or, are you not convinced of the need for reproducibility in data science? My rationale for this is the following: if you are building ML models that are going to make important decisions in production, it's imperative for debuggability that you're able to re-run that model training run later. If a
Read the rest
model makes a bad decision in production, you need to know what dataset it was trained on, which means needing to be able to retrieve that dataset. That's because you can't isolate and fix the problem without being able to re-run it. Yes, data changes and marches forwards, and that's why you should retrain models. But you also need to be able to go backwards to do robust ML. My 2 cents. I also wrote a DevOps for ML Manifesto: https://dotscience.com/manifesto/ To summarize: 1. All models must be reproducible by someone else 6 months later. 2. All models must be accountable, that means you must be able to justify the basis on which they made their decision, in particular you need to know which data version was used and where it came from (provenance). 3. Model development must be collaborative. That means I need to be able fork a copy of your project and maintain all the metadata about which runs you did, with their respective provenance history. 4. Models must have a continuous lifecycle. You're not done when you ship - because models are about finding patterns in data, and the world is constantly changing, you need statistical monitoring and retraining to compensate for model drift. Do you disagree? Did I miss anything? Let me know your thoughts!
In Run tracking liberates ML teams

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.