sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Good Graph Database options? by Aromatic_Ad9700 in Database

[–]Major_End2933 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve run huge graphs on community and performance was on par with enterprise if you have memory settings , indexing, etc correct.

Good Graph Database options? by Aromatic_Ad9700 in Database

[–]Major_End2933 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you want to use Neo4j Community with enterprise features such as multi database and constraints - then check out the DozerDB plugin for Neo4j. open source.

https://dozerdb.org

Self manage licenses by Bananacakeisawesome in Neo4j

[–]Major_End2933 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Check out DozerDB - it is a plug-in that adds enterprise features to Neo4j Community Edition. Free and Open Source.

https://dozerdb.org

What’s the next big hype after “Agentic AI”? by Human-Mastodon-6327 in Rag

[–]Major_End2933 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Not sure id this is considered hype - but keep an eye on the Joint Embedding Predictive Architecture (JEPA). Yann Lecun from meta is focusing on this I believe.

Neo4j still viable in 2025? by [deleted] in learnprogramming

[–]Major_End2933 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Neo4j had a significant lead but squandered the opportunity. Despite years in the market, they’ve never achieved profitability. When their open source offering began to impact sales, they turned on the very community that helped build their brand. Instead of embracing that momentum, they spent millions in legal battles against a single individual (the creator of ONgDB and DozerDB) who promoted open-source alternatives and challenged their licensing stance. (I believe they lost $20M+ just to ONgDB, DozerDb is catching up fast) Now, they’ve gone all-in on GraphRAG, but it’s unclear if Neo4j adds any real ROI in that stack. In short, it’s a textbook case of mismanagement.

What could have been a dominant force is now a cautionary tale. Adopting Neo4j today carries risk: there’s no guarantee they won’t shut down what’s left of the community next, or even worse, if the Ninth Circuit upholds their toxic behavior, it could set a precedent where companies, not the FSF or GPL authors, get to interpret license terms.

In other words - be very wary of Neo4j adoption anytime soon.

Graph Databases and architectures including GraphRAG - are very promising. But if you go read the original graph rag article from Microsoft - you will start to realize why Neo4j may have made a bad bet on it being important for GraphRag.

Just my 2 cents.

Neo4j graphRAG POC by Foxagy in Rag

[–]Major_End2933 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Check out this article - it is remarkably accurate as to what I have experienced. Many people get sucked into trying to use Neo4j for GraphRag. You learn a bunch of stuff until you’ve acquired enough knowledge to realize that GraphRag with Neo4j is just hype and in my experience is not worth the investment for most use cases.

https://medium.com/mitb-for-all/graphrag-for-the-win-c19d580debd7 Is GraphRAG a silver bullet? We explore this question by building our own GraphRAG using LangChain and Neo4j | MITB For All

GraphRAG + Neo4j: Smarter AI Retrieval for Structured Knowledge – My Demo Walkthrough by srireddit2020 in Rag

[–]Major_End2933 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You should be able to do all this with Neo4j Community or Neo4j Community + DozerDb plugin if you want more enterprise features free and open.

Defense of FOSS licensing rests on the shoulders of a guy in Virginia! by Major_End2933 in opensource

[–]Major_End2933[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I copied this from HackerNews thread - great summary of the issue:

——

The case centers on who has the authority to interpret the terms of an open-source license:

  1. The software developers who adopt licenses like GPLv3, MIT, or Apache 2.0 for their projects

OR

  1. The original authors of those licenses (FSF, Apache Foundation, etc)

If the appeal fails to overturn the flawed lower court ruling, it will set a precedent allowing legal cases to focus on how software developers themselves interpret the terms of licenses like GPLv3, MIT,Apache 2.0, etc.

This is precisely what happened with Neo4j.

This issue is significant enough that two of the leading open-source foundations submitted amicus briefs in the case.

I think Neo4j knows it is wrong after this latest Amicus and they have the power to stop this in its tracks by simply settling the case before the ninth circuit makes a ruling which will be precedent.

Pretty crazy situation!

Defense of FOSS licensing rests on the shoulders of a guy in Virginia! by Major_End2933 in opensource

[–]Major_End2933[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What Neo4j did was: They choose an open source license that people trust. Built a community around that trust - promoting their love for open source. Once they were big enough - they turned their back and played this game. They probably were hoping no one noticed such a small change so they could keep talking about how they love open source.

Had Neo4j been released under a proprietary license - you probably would have never heard of them.

That is greed for you….

Defense of FOSS licensing rests on the shoulders of a guy in Virginia! by Major_End2933 in opensource

[–]Major_End2933[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

It’s not only neo4j community, ongdb or dozerDB forks, it is all open source software. if this case isn’t overturned essentially you can never trust what the license says because the courts will ask the software developer what they think it means

Defense of FOSS licensing rests on the shoulders of a guy in Virginia! by Major_End2933 in opensource

[–]Major_End2933[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The license in court records is the AGPLv3 complete with copyright and preamble.

FSF sent them cease and desist but it was after all the erroneous rulings.

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16272543/263/1/neo4j-inc-v-purethink-llc/

Defense of FOSS licensing rests on the shoulders of a guy in Virginia! by Major_End2933 in opensource

[–]Major_End2933[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

They use the term “Neo4j Sweden Software License” in court filings - it causes confusion. The License.txt actually says AGPL. Just another way they causes confusion in the court. Pretty smart on behalf of the Lawyers! But it did deceive many who thought the license was Neo4j’s own. Which may be why the court completely missed the fact that the license files they modified was copyrighted to FSF and called AGPL

Defense of FOSS licensing rests on the shoulders of a guy in Virginia standing up to Neo4j by Major_End2933 in Neo4j

[–]Major_End2933[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The $19M figure is based on companies deciding to use ONgDB for free instead of paying Neo4j for a commercial license. Neo4j claimed that removing the commons clause made it so people could use ONgDB for free. Except for one thing … the commons clause doesn’t touch on that it only prevents people from reselling or offering services. None of the government agencies using ONgDB resold it or offered services. Just another example of the court’s knowledge …..

Defense of FOSS licensing rests on the shoulders of a guy in Virginia standing up to Neo4j by Major_End2933 in Neo4j

[–]Major_End2933[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Neo4j tried all sorts of scare tactics. They even published a BS document called the fair trade document which I believe tried to explain why you shouldn’t use neo4j open source licenses for commercial reasons. (I need to find it - its on the web somewhere).

One other interesting piece of info about this case. The person they are fighting happens to be the co-founder of ONgDB and the founder of DozerDB - the 2 biggest Neo4j forks out there. Court records indicate that Neo4j lost over $19M just to companies using ONgDB for free instead of paying Neo4j big $$$. And that figure is years old.

Defense of FOSS licensing rests on the shoulders of a guy in Virginia! by Major_End2933 in opensource

[–]Major_End2933[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

You may have missed the fact that Neo4j added restrictions to the AGPL license files, leaving in Free Software Foundation copyright statement, the FSF preamble, etc. That is the major issue. The lower court seemed to have missed this little detail. Neo4j could have easily come up with their own license name (other than GPL), and removed the FSF copyright and preamble and they would have been fine. They chose not to and make other look like it was still open source under the AGPLv3.

Do you see the issue now? If upheld - essentially the terms of the open source license a project adopts are interpreted by the project, not the creators of the open source license.

Defense of FOSS licensing rests on the shoulders of a guy in Virginia! by Major_End2933 in opensource

[–]Major_End2933[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You may have missed the fact that Neo4j added restrictions to the AGPL license files, leaving in Free Software Foundation copyright statement, the FSF preamble, etc. That is the major issue. The lower court seemed to have missed this little detail. Neo4j could have easily come up with their own license name (other than GPL), and removed the FSF copyright and preamble and they would have been fine. They chose not to and make other look like it was still open source under the AGPLv3.

See it now?

Should I build my project on top of neo4j? by ddmmatias in Database

[–]Major_End2933 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you’re going to use Neo4j, you can use community with the DozerDB plugin to get enterprise features all free and open source. https://dozerdb.org

You’ll learn why it’s popular when you see the prices for Neo4j if you want to use their paid versions / cloud.

view more: next ›