Exceptional walk through the metadata architecture evolution here. The BigQuery CMETA reference is particularly sharp because it highlights that even when using relational metadata, Google doesn't put everything in one central table. They maintain per-table CMETA structures, which sidesteps the billion-row scalability concern you raised. That nuance mattersfor anyone considering DuckLake at scale. The Hive comparison is spot-on, but I think the real test for DuckLake will be how well it handles the write-heavy pattern you alluded to. Iceberg's manifest file explosion is annoying, but at least it doesn't require exclusive locks during commits. If DuckLake's metadata DB becomes a write bottleneck during heavy ETL windows, all the operational simplicity gains evaporate.
That's an important point to highlight. Hive was inefficient handling similar concurrent workloads for its ACID tables, especially with table-level exclusive locks. The DuckLake specification needs to address how it will handle high-concurrency write-heavy workloads.
Very well written and thorough article. I like how you walked us through the history of why we are at this inflection point. This always helps ground the reader on the overall purpose of. Thanks, Matt
DuckLake is an interesting attempt to push metadata back into an RDB, but in terms of enterprise-level maturity, scalability, and ecosystem support, it is not yet a full substitute for Delta Lake + Unity Catalog.
While I continue to monitor DuckLake-style approaches as a research topic, I still recommend my corporate clients the proven Databricks Lakehouse for production-grade, company-wide Data & AI platform.
I agree. DuckLake is still in its early stages, and it will take some time before the project matures enough to be suitable for use in corporate production environments.
Exceptional walk through the metadata architecture evolution here. The BigQuery CMETA reference is particularly sharp because it highlights that even when using relational metadata, Google doesn't put everything in one central table. They maintain per-table CMETA structures, which sidesteps the billion-row scalability concern you raised. That nuance mattersfor anyone considering DuckLake at scale. The Hive comparison is spot-on, but I think the real test for DuckLake will be how well it handles the write-heavy pattern you alluded to. Iceberg's manifest file explosion is annoying, but at least it doesn't require exclusive locks during commits. If DuckLake's metadata DB becomes a write bottleneck during heavy ETL windows, all the operational simplicity gains evaporate.
That's an important point to highlight. Hive was inefficient handling similar concurrent workloads for its ACID tables, especially with table-level exclusive locks. The DuckLake specification needs to address how it will handle high-concurrency write-heavy workloads.
Very well written and thorough article. I like how you walked us through the history of why we are at this inflection point. This always helps ground the reader on the overall purpose of. Thanks, Matt
I'm glad you found it useful.
مثل همیشه ازت یاد گرفتم.
عالی بود
Interesting post!!
DuckLake is an interesting attempt to push metadata back into an RDB, but in terms of enterprise-level maturity, scalability, and ecosystem support, it is not yet a full substitute for Delta Lake + Unity Catalog.
While I continue to monitor DuckLake-style approaches as a research topic, I still recommend my corporate clients the proven Databricks Lakehouse for production-grade, company-wide Data & AI platform.
I agree. DuckLake is still in its early stages, and it will take some time before the project matures enough to be suitable for use in corporate production environments.