[twoodfin]

The use case is local user DuckDB talking to MotherDuck for $.

This is not commercially a terrible idea. Why keep paying Snowflake for bog-standard SQL query workload when SF makes it easy to migrate to Iceberg & commodity engines like MotherDuck?

[szarnyasg]

Hello, DuckDB DevRel here. Quack is independent from MotherDuck. MotherDuck has its own proprietary protocol, which has been around for years and it supports things like dual execution – see more here:

https://duckdb.org/quack/faq#what-is-the-relationship-betwee...

Of course, in the future MotherDuck can also support Quack, but this is not the only interesting use case for Quack.

[twoodfin]

Sure! Not knocking the architecture: Building out peer-to-peer federation in place of client/server makes perfect sense for DuckDB. And I’m a big fan of owning the protocol so you can optimize it to internal structures.

Just making the point that DuckDB is disruptive technology & what it’s most likely to disrupt.

[simlevesque]

MotherDuck is very expensive.

[dmkii]

Compared to what exactly? Snowflake? Hiring an engineer to deploy DuckDB? A hobby project? FWIW I work at MotherDuck so obviously biased, but curious to hear what makes you say that.