I really love(d) LogSeq, as it’s everything I need to handle personal and univeristy notes. The only reason I moved back to joplin (and I’m not using again LogSeq) is that LogSeq does not offer also a self-hosted version of its sync server feature.
We have to rely on third party apps.
I know the policy of the project, I’m aware that this is a way to contribute to the project, but will there be any chance that we see an officially supported self-hosted version of the sync app?
I know you’re asking for an option that doesn’t use a third party app, and initially this was a concern for me too. However since I started using Syncthing, which is FOSS & self hosted and is doing such a solid job keeping all my Devices up to date, I really don’t have any complaints any more. Not sure how this is gonna be with the new architecture that’s coming, but I could imagine, that since this option exists, a selfhosted option within Logseq isn’t a top priority for the devs, but that’s just my guess.
Using the MD version with syncthing is what I do now. I use it for my GTD system. There are some caveats, though. The biggest one being that this setup does not handle page renames well. This might not be a problem for usage patterns where you’re always adding or editing. However, for me, I rename several pages a week because of how I handle projects, moving them to different namespaces to indicate different states for the project.
Basically, any time I rename a page and the changes get sync’ed via syncthing, I have to be sure to do a re-index on all the other devices or they’re create sync conflicts. I think the reason is that the other devices are still using their in-memory index and a lot of the times they don’t pick up that a page has been deleted. So they assume it’s still there and, sometimes, they’ll even recreate the MD file because it still exists in their index so it should exist on disk.
Anyway, something to be aware of. Syncthing is not officially supported by the Logseq project so it will likely always have corner-cases and some odd behavior. As long as you’re comfortable with that, go ahead.
I do hope that Synthing creates a self-hosted sync service in the future as well. I understand that they are building a support model for the project and, frankly, I would normally just pay their very low and reasonable fee for their sync service. However, for me, it comes down to a privacy issue, not a money issue. I highly value my privacy and I simply don’t want my data on other peoples’ servers. Even if that data was encrypted at rest, I would still prefer my own, on-site solution for sync. That’s just my values.
Yeah. I would hope there could be a self-hosted server that the Logseq devs create. But it might end up being a job for a team outside of the official Logseq team. Just needs to be maintained and have enough enthusiasm behind it to get it from hacky to stable.
FWIW, if the dev team open-sources the sync backend, I don’t think that would cut into their funding stream. Most people don’t want to do self-hosting stuff, even Dockerized ones. Most people are fine paying 10% or so of the cost they were paying to Evernote or whatever big name they used before. Paying for sync is still a steal-of-a-deal and it helps the project. I would absolutely do it if I weren’t one of the weird ones ultra-concerned about privacy.
I’ve been using Syncthing for a long while now with logseq (and obsidian for some things). Works like a dream for me. I mean it’s not as good as a database I suppose but it’s more than adequate for my purposes. Might be worht a separate topic if you want a hand setting up or something.