HackerReposA FIELD GUIDE TO OPEN SOURCE
ProSponsor the shelf♧ 0
← Back to top all-time
OdyseeTeam
chainquery
Go2019–2025
OdyseeTeam / chainquery

chainquery

Chainquery parses and syncs the LBRY blockchain data into structured SQL

5Distinct people
6Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
2.2KGitHub stars
REPOSITORY AT A GLANCE

What to know before exploring

What it is

Chainquery parses and syncs the LBRY blockchain data into structured SQL

GitHub

Where it is used

No documented product use has been verified yet.

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, 3:56:07 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: 2019-02-20 16:42:17 UTC to 2025-12-26 06:51:07 UTC.

0123452019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 5 mentions; 0 submissions, 5 comments20192020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments20222023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 0 mentions; 0 submissions, 0 comments2025-01-01 00:00:00 UTC to 2026-01-01 00:00:00 UTC (exclusive): 1 mentions; 0 submissions, 1 comments2025

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
20192019-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC505
20202020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20212021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20222022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
20232023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC2024-01-01 00:00:00 UTC000
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 UTC101

What Hacker News says

6 sources
Here's an example where a bug could exist in go due torn writes in a real program. I found this by searching for places where folks reload there config at runtime, as they are generally a place where people forget to synchronize correctly in go. 1. A viper.OnConfigChange callback is set up to call readConfig(): https://github.com/OdyseeTeam/chainquery/blob/48c092515dea5c... 2. Inside readConfig(), we assign to a slice `twillio.RecipientList` (https://github.com/OdyseeTeam/chainquery/blob/48c092515dea5c... 3. Note that in Go, slices are objects composed of 3 words (https://go.dev/blog/slices-intro#slice-internals) And there isn't syncronization built-in over updating them. As a result, if something reads the slice while it's being updated we will mix together a data pointer & length & capacity that correspond to different real slice object
Read the rest
s. If the length we read is from a slice that has real length 10, but the data pointer we read is from a slice with real length 1, when iterating we'll read memory out of bounds. 4. in the context of this particular program, we may send SMSs to recipients who were never in the configured list if a config change occurs at the right time. Or a segfault. Entirely unclear if reading the memory will result in reasonable behavior. Note: I'm not familiar with this repo otherwise. This is from a quick search.
In Memory Safety
>Okay, so for a use case like The Pirate Bay, which is a popular database of magnet links and related metadata (Description, who added to the database, when added, etc). Users search this data in various ways. The problem with this search index is that it requires all of the .torrent files containing the metadata. In lbry this metadata (as well as more rich fields) are stored to the blockchain, so any full blockchain node has the information to provide more sophisticated searches. Chainquery is what runs a full node and provides the search engine for the UI (https://github.com/lbryio/chainquery). >As in, how would a user search it or find popular torrents? As indicated above, if they're using the UI it provides a search engine via chainquery. Torrents are also not a currently supported source type for a download, however there is nothing
Read the rest
to stop it from being added.
In Ask HN: Before We Spend Millions, What Do You Think of This Blockchain Use Case?
Hey, thanks for the comments! We don't think it's a matter of verification / financial incentives for the blockchain use case, but instead, it's the censorship-resistant, permissionless, and spam prevention factors that count. If we had a centralized database, we could potentially limit access or overwrite records. As far as discovery goes, we've developed a product that helps with exactly this problem - it's called Chainquery. It digests all the metadata from the blockchain into SQL tables that can be easily queried. Check it out at https://github.com/lbryio/chainquery/
In Ask HN: Before We Spend Millions, What Do You Think of This Blockchain Use Case?

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.