/jump to repo

Repos Recent Bookmarks Watched Notes Tags Discover Compare Stats GitHub

Repository brief

cockroachdb/cockroach

Read the upstream summary on the left, browse the cached forks below it, and load each fork comparison into the right-hand panel.

Cached analysis

cached 2026-03-30T15:26:21.930Z

1mo ago

cockroachdb/cockroach

CockroachDB is a large, active Go codebase for a cloud-native distributed SQL database. It is aimed at high availability, horizontal scale, and controlled data placement, with PostgreSQL wire-protocol compatibility and extensive docs for deployment and operations. The repository is highly starred and widely forked, which makes it a significant upstream if you are evaluating fork activity or long-term maintenance interest.

Loading tags...

Stars31,974

Forks4,104

Default branchmaster

Last pushed2026-03-30T15:21:20Z

Recommended shortcuts

Jump straight into Discofork's strongest cached fork picks, or open a compare view in one click.

Forks

Choose a fork to inspect

10 of 10 fork briefs

Maintenance:

Magnitude:

Sort:

Selected

Choose this fork only if you need the Picolo/Web3-specific branch and are prepared to maintain a deeply outdated CockroachDB derivative yourself. If you want a supported distributed SQL database, the upstream project is the safer choice.

Prefer this fork only if you want the historical upstream state exactly and do not need current CockroachDB fixes or features. For most adopters, upstream is the better choice because this fork shows no added value and is extremely far behind.

Do not choose this fork for active production use unless you specifically want a frozen 2024 snapshot and are willing to own all future maintenance; active users should prefer upstream.

Prefer this fork only if you need an old, heavily modified CockroachDB baseline for experimentation or reproduction. For any production, upgrade-sensitive, or maintenance-heavy use, current upstream is the better choice because this fork is stale and materially behind.

Prefer upstream unless you specifically need the 2024 snapshot this fork preserves. This fork shows no added capabilities and is far behind upstream, so it is not a good adoption candidate for ongoing use.

Do not adopt this fork if you want a maintained database platform. It offers no visible value over upstream and is far behind on fixes and features; only choose it as a historical snapshot.

Prefer upstream unless you explicitly need the old 2023 snapshot. This fork adds no visible features, is heavily behind, and is best treated as an archival or personal reference copy rather than a maintained alternative.

Do not adopt this fork for product or operational use. It is a stale, documentation-only divergence from an active upstream and offers no evident functional advantages over upstream CockroachDB.

Prefer upstream unless you need an exact frozen snapshot from March 2023. This fork does not appear to add features or maintenance value, and its large distance from upstream makes it a poor adoption target for production or active development.

Prefer upstream unless you specifically need a frozen 2022-era snapshot; this fork offers no visible downstream enhancements and is too far behind for practical adoption.

Fork comparison

picolonet/storage

38/100

stale

significant_divergence

Choose this fork only if you need the Picolo/Web3-specific branch and are prepared to maintain a deeply outdated CockroachDB derivative yourself. If you want a supported distributed SQL database, the upstream project is the safer choice.

Likely purpose

To rebrand and repurpose CockroachDB for Picolo Network / Web 3.0 use, with substantial local customization and a long-lived fork baseline.

Best for

Teams intentionally preserving an old CockroachDB fork for a specialized product.; Engineers comfortable owning a large database codebase and backporting fixes themselves.; Users who care more about fork-specific branding and embedded workflows than upstream parity.

Additional features

Web 3.0 / Picolo-specific branding and positioning.
Fork-specific operational and packaging changes around deployment and monitoring artifacts, including roachprod and Prometheus configuration.
Local API/schema regeneration and UI asset changes, suggesting the fork carries its own integrated product surface rather than only a thin patch set.
Expands API, schema, or SDK surface area for downstream integrations and generated clients.
Introduces more operational workflow surface such as server-side handling, auth, session control, or admin tooling.
Changes agent workflow behavior, such as prompt handling, handoffs, worktrees, memory, or orchestration flow.

Missing features

Roughly six-plus years of upstream CockroachDB development and fixes are missing, given the 2018 fork point and the 40,914 commits behind upstream signal.
Current upstream maintenance, bug fixes, and compatibility work are absent.
Modern upstream testing and operational improvements are likely missing or much harder to adopt without a major rebase.
Upstream product polish around docs, tooling, and deployment workflows appears far behind.
Some upstream behavior appears to be removed, disabled, or intentionally stripped down in this fork.
It trails upstream by 40914 commits, so some recent upstream features and fixes are likely not present yet.

Strengths

Very large historical codebase to build on if you need a CockroachDB-derived system.
Clear fork identity and branding for a Picolo/Web3 product.
Potentially useful as a frozen baseline for a narrow, self-owned deployment environment.

Risks

Extremely stale relative to upstream, so security, correctness, and compatibility risk are high.
Large divergence makes rebasing or cherry-picking from upstream expensive.
Adopters inherit a very large maintenance burden.
The fork metadata and commit history suggest the repository is no longer actively maintained.