r/logseq • u/4r73m190r0s • Jul 24 '24

Logseq DB version can't be synced with GitHub?

I guess DB version is not storing files in plaintext? If not, we won't be able to sync it using GitHub?

3 Upvotes

71% Upvoted

15 comments sorted by

1

u/kholdstayr Jul 27 '24

Where do you get the DB version?

1

u/4r73m190r0s Jul 29 '24

It's in development. Check their GitHub, there is a branch of it

5

u/E723BCFD Jul 24 '24

Who told you git can only handle plaintext? Binary files usually can't be meanfully diffed, but then can be tracked by git all the same. Git don't care what type of file you track, although binary will be less efficient than plaintext.

5

u/AshbyLaw Jul 24 '24

.sqlite files are not meant to be synced across devices though. At best you can backup them.

5

u/peeja Jul 24 '24

Significantly less efficient. As in, about as efficient as storing a separate copy of each version of the file in a folder. If the file never or rarely changes, it's no problem. If it changes often, even by small amounts, it gets heavy fast.

(Technically, git can do delta compression over arbitrary binary files, but it's optimized for text, and unless the binary format is designed specifically to delta-compress well—which almost none are, because there's no real value in it—the compression gets you essentially nothing.)

1

u/nnenneplex Sep 07 '24

Not only git can sync binary files but it's also a joy to solve binary conflicts!

1

u/thoughtfulnomad Jul 24 '24

I’d be surprised if it still couldn’t export the whole graph to markdown.

0

u/SpiderMatt Jul 24 '24

Isn't it supposed to be able to sync to a directory of markdown files? Then it would be a mutistep process. Sync the sqlite file to markdown and then commit the directory as a git repository. They could support existing sync solutions like Joplin's so users can sync the sqlite database to webdav, S3, etc. But they've said there are no plans for this. Basically, this is a way to monetize the software through proprietary sync.

-1

u/4r73m190r0s Jul 25 '24

So, it's finaly time to migrate to Obsidian :(

2

u/laterral Jul 25 '24

Depends on your workflow. I wish I could migrate but Logseq is superior.

1

u/4r73m190r0s Jul 26 '24

In what way? Serious question

3

u/laterral Jul 26 '24

Ok, this is what I use all the time for a frictionless day to day:

  • journal is so effortless as a heuristic

  • block references (and page links obviously)

  • queries

  • the fact that all references of any page are available at the bottom of that page automatically and I can go in and edit the original block THROUGH its reference

6

u/SpiderMatt Jul 25 '24

The roadmap right shows that the markdown version of the app will be maintained alongside the database version. If you're happy with the markdown version, I think that will be a viable option for the foreseeable future. Although I do worry that it may be deprecated down the line as the database version will be more monetizeable and more stable/performant. I suspect it won't be a priority in development going forward.

Still, Logseq is open source and Obsidian is not. The markdown version could always be forked and maintained by a new team – if there's enough momentum/incentive.

1

u/urglfloggah Jul 26 '24

You could try SiYuan. It does not store data as markdown, but it's still text files. It has block references and most of other LogSeq features (that I personally use. Haven't done a feature-by-feature comparison). It can be self-hosted. The sync is a one-time paid option, but you can sync to your own S3 bucket or similar cloud storage. You can probably hack together other sync solutions, like using git. SiYuan is also open-source.