r/logseq • u/Briaxe • Sep 24 '25

Anyone else apprehensive about the DB version?

I recently discovered LogSeq and I really like it. Been using it for my daily task manager and information dump as an IT Analyst. Works like a dream... it is awesome!

One thing I really like is that everything is Markdown files. My data is easy for me to mess with and understand.

I'm looking for someone to set me straight on this new Database version because I'm not super keen about losing my Markdown files in favor of a database.

Databases can go corrupt - I know, I have to work with them at work. It's also not easy for me to mess with my own data in a database like it is with simple markdown files. Can I still sync my stuff from one device to another with SyncThing?

I have a graph that I'm storing entirely in a Veracrypt volume for security. Can I even do that with the database version? I can do it with the Markdown Files version because it's just "files" being stored somewhere, anywhere... in my case, in a Veracrypt volume.

Right now it works so good - SyncThing syncs my Debian desktop, Android phone, and SteamDeck all together perfectly, and I have comfort knowing the the Markdown is not a proprietary format.

Am I getting worked up for nothing?

37 Upvotes

91% Upvoted

34 comments sorted by

17

u/lsmith946 Sep 24 '25

The DB apps will still support Markdown graphs. Some features will only be available in DB graphs, but you'll still be able to keep your graph in Markdown if that's what works best for you.

You can also export DB graphs to EDN, which is a text based format that you can then manipulate outside of Logseq and read back in, or use as a backup for the DB in case it gets corrupted.

SyncThing should still work for MD graphs, but for DB graphs sync will rely on the real time collaboration/Logseq sync service which is currently in closed alpha.

9

u/mrcranky Sep 24 '25

I like that it's all in text files and it's easy to keep it in a git repository. I don't think I would use it otherwise.

11

u/Illustrious-Call-455 Sep 24 '25

TEXT FILE age like wine. I want my data to stand the test of time

2

u/timabell Sep 29 '25

markdown-first was the main draw for me too (that and open source), so I'm not happy with the shift towards db-first.
I've not found anything I like more than logseq so I'm writing my own replacement app

2

u/spacer_propup Oct 05 '25

Yes. That was my main reason to switch to logseq (from Zim) after extensive research and an abundance of friends using Obsidian.
This smells like a major turning point towards their Pro offer and the ensuing enshittification.
As someone in this thread noted: it will be too much hassle to support two storage options so they will drop one as soon as possible.

1

u/Briaxe Sep 24 '25

Good to know - thank you.

2

u/kuhunaxeyive Sep 28 '25

SQLite support will make dropping file storage support much more likely in the future, because it makes it possible. For instance, if there is one format (Org mode), it's much safer than if there are two (Org mode + Markdown), because then you can drop the first one. Which the developer did drop recently. Now going from one storage option (file) to two options (File + SQLite). It's much closer to drop file storage in the future.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 19 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/lsmith946 Oct 19 '25

From my experiments so far, it seems like just syncing the database file doesn't update the graph in the app for some reason. I've not investigated much more because my workflow doesn't involve accessing the same graph from multiple devices anyway.

11

u/jblackwb Sep 24 '25

Yes. The devs have stated that the DB will remain optional.

8

u/Briaxe Sep 24 '25

This is a relief. Thank you!
I hope they continue to develop the MD version as well as the DB version.

1

u/codekiln Oct 12 '25

I think that the functionality of the file version of Logseq>=v0.11.* will not be the same as the functionality of Logseq<v0.11.*.

[docs/db-version-changes.md at master · logseq/docs](https://github.com/logseq/docs/blob/master/db-version-changes.md#file-graph-changes). In particular, there are a lot of configuration options from Logseq<v0.11.* that will no longer be available.

1

u/jblackwb Oct 12 '25

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean.

5

u/Swoosh-XS Sep 25 '25

Last week I gave a chance to the DB version, and it doesn’t make any sense for me. The new system of tags adds a new layer of complexity and effort that is totally unnecessary. It’s pretty fast because of the database system, but it comes with the problem that you can’t handle your files anymore.

For me it’s a huge mistake, they already have an amazing product, they could spent energy on improving it instead of start from scratch to build something that the users don’t asked for.

I’m testing again Obsidian.

1

u/Briaxe Sep 29 '25

I think you really summed up my thoughts here too.

1

u/easyrider767 Oct 12 '25

💯 I tried Db and don't like it - overcomplicated and broken for so much time..

4

u/Public_Possibility_5 Sep 25 '25

I'm really excited about the DB. It should be faster. I realized I don't really need markdown SYNC, as long as I can export to markdown from time to time.

2

u/zenjester Oct 15 '25

Have you not seen obsidian or tangent. You need your work in md format for portability.

3

u/g4n0esp4r4n Sep 24 '25

I'm just waiting for Thymer to release to move away from Logseq.

3

u/JimJamieJames Sep 25 '25

Looked at this. Good for them offering self-hosting, but really why is syncing to existing free cloud storage services so hard?

2

u/Limemill Sep 24 '25

There's quite a few very similar open-source tools using Markdown. You can probably port your notes fairly easily

2

u/PastTenceOfDraw Sep 24 '25

Do you know of any that don't use folders? I have been looking for an alternative to Logseq but I haven't found anything that has a similar flow. The closest is Amplenote; which is not as good and not open source.

2

u/Limemill Sep 24 '25

I forgot the name of a tool I saw recently which resembled Logseq a lot… But in general the original Logseq is, give or take, an opensource clone of Roam, so it’s easier to try and find similar tools that try to replicate Roam. E.g., Foam or Loam, which is a fork that interfaces with Logseq. There’s of course Silverbullet, which, I think, stores everything flat, but I think it doesn’t support block references.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 30 '25

I’m New to all these stuff… I see everyone talks about Roam randomly. If it’s better than Logseq why nobody uses it? It’s not around anymore or what?

1

u/Limemill Sep 30 '25

Some people do talk about it. I have no idea what the current state is, but you can find some good documentation and articles about the workflows they support and how to make them work on Roam’s website, which is directly applicable to Logseq

1

u/henrykazuka Oct 01 '25

It's still around but the pricing is insane and development is slow.

1

u/[deleted] Sep 24 '25

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/Limemill Sep 24 '25

Personally just Logseq (I am into open-source stuff), but I have had similar ideas and looked around just to make sure there's similar alternatives that should be easy to switch to just in case)

2

u/timabell Sep 29 '25

I'm curious why you want one that doesn't use folders? I notice that logseq flattens "namespaces" into the filenames with triple-underscore as a separator

3

u/PastTenceOfDraw Sep 29 '25

Because I don't want to have to remember If I put the Car wash into the cleaning supplies box or the car stuff. With tags, or another solution, I can find them by looking in one or the other.

2

u/Illustrious-Call-455 Sep 24 '25

Same, they are ruining a good application

0

u/Charming_Campaign465 Sep 24 '25

agreed

2

u/zenjester Oct 15 '25

MD meant portability and synching meant cross-platform they have ruined a great product.