Draft talk:QuestDB
Add topic | The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
Source assessment (provided by draft author)
[edit]Disclosure: I am a QuestDB employee (see my user page, per WP:PAID). This is a source-by-source self-assessment against WP:SIRS, provided to make review easier after the March 2025 decline. Sources are cited in the draft for facts even where they do not contribute to notability.
| Source | Independent? | Significant coverage? | Reliable? | Secondary? | Counts toward notability? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jiang et al., Enhanced Differential Testing in Emerging Database Systems, ISSTA 2025 (with companion ACME, FSE 2026) | Yes (NUS; no QuestDB affiliation) | Yes. QuestDB is the primary evaluation target (44 of 57 bugs found; multi-page treatment) | Yes (peer-reviewed, top SE venue) | Yes | Yes (the two papers are one research group, counted once) |
| Khelifati et al., TSM-Bench, PVLDB 16(11) 2023 | Yes (Fribourg/Bolzano/NYU-AD) | Partial. Dedicated architecture description and QuestDB-specific results; one of seven systems | Yes (peer-reviewed, top DB venue) | Yes | Yes, with the one-of-several caveat |
| Wolters, Blazevic & Riehle, On-Premise IoT Data Storage, IoTBDS 2023 | Yes (Univ. Münster/Osnabrück) | Partial. QuestDB one of two TSDBs selected; about 1.5 pages of QuestDB-specific results | Yes (peer-reviewed) | Yes | Partial |
| Asay, TechRepublic, Feb 2021 (via Wayback Machine archive) | Mostly. Bylined commentary with independent analysis of architecture and licensing; includes founder interviews | Yes (about 1,300 words entirely on QuestDB) | Yes | Yes | Partial (commentary label noted) |
| InfoWorld Bossie Awards 2020 | Yes (independent editorial evaluation, includes criticism) | No (about 200 words within a 25-product feature) | Yes | Yes | Corroborating only |
| TechCrunch (Nov 2021) | Partial (reliable outlet, interview and announcement driven) | Yes (dedicated article) | Yes | Yes | Cited for history facts only (WP:ORGTRIV acknowledged) |
| heise online (2024), InfoQ (2024) | Yes | No (routine release coverage) | Yes | Yes | Cited for facts only; shows sustained editorial attention |
| Wu et al., Unicorn, ISSTA 2022; Shehbaz et al., IEEE 2025/2026; Karlstetter, PhD thesis TU München 2023 | Yes | No to partial | Yes | Yes | Cited for specific technical and architecture facts only |
Deliberately not cited: DB-Engines rankings, GitHub metrics, press releases and wire syndication, QuestDB-authored contributed articles, podcasts and interviews, and the passing mentions identified in the March 2025 review (Crotty CIDR 2022, CMU lecture slides, VentureBeat). Primary sources (the project's GitHub release notes and documentation) are used only for release dates and feature descriptions per WP:ABOUTSELF, never for notability. Supercoco9 (talk) 16:14, 21 July 2026 (UTC)
@Caleb Stanford: You reviewed the February 2025 version of this draft and suggested searching out more substantial sources. This rebuild follows that advice, so a re-review would be welcome if you have time, though there is no obligation and the normal AfC queue is fine. Thanks! Supercoco9 (talk) 16:14, 21 July 2026 (UTC)
- No time at the moment, GL with the article. Caleb Stanford (talk) 16:32, 21 July 2026 (UTC)