Public record
Software health reportschema 0.34.0 · metrics 2.10.0 · 2026-09-28 02:54 UTC

surrealdb / vart

An immutable, copy-on-write, versioned adaptive radix trie data-structure

RustApache-2.0★ 116 stars⑂ 21 forkssince Jun 2023View on GitHub ↗

surrealdb/vart holds a health index of 80 out of 100, placing it in the Excellent band. It scores highest on Sustainability & Governance (77/100) and lowest on Community & Adoption (59/100). It was last updated 1 day ago. A single contributor accounts for most of its recent work.

80
overall / 100
Excellent

Software health index

Metrics are grouped into weighted categories on one standardized 1–100 scale. Overall starts as their weighted mean, calibrated against the distribution of the public record so bands carry percentile meaning; when public evidence triggers the High-Risk Jurisdiction Policy, the rating is adjusted and receives an At Risk ceiling of 34.

80
Exceptional93-100The record's top tier (≈ top 5%); essentially all checked criteria met
Excellent80-92Strong across the board; minor gaps
Good65-79Healthy; gaps are limited and manageable
Moderate50-64Acceptable with notable gaps; review recommended
Weak35-49Material weaknesses across several areas
At Risk20-34Significant weaknesses; adoption warrants caution
Critical1-19Severe problems (abandoned, single-maintainer, no hygiene)
VitalityCommunity &AdoptionSustainability &GovernanceEngineeringQualitySecurityAI Readiness

Score profile

Each axis is a category. The shape matters more than the average — a healthy subject fills the whole shape, while a spike-and-crater profile means strength in one dimension is masking risk in another.

The weighted overall 68 is calibrated to 80 on the published index scale (record calibration 2026-08-02).

Ownership

SurrealDBOrganization · verified domain
1,483 followers135 public repossince Feb 2015

This repository is backed by an organization — shared, accountable stewardship that can outlive any single maintainer.

Package ecosystems

RegistryPackageVersionDownloads / moVersionsLast publishTags
crates.iovart0.10.0230,468222 days agoadaptive-radix-trieimmutable-trieradix-triesnapshot-isolationtrie

Metrics by category

Vitality

Is the project alive — is code being written and are releases shipping?

69Good · 21% of overall
How it's scored
36/36Push recency — last push 1 days ago
1.4/36Commit cadence — 2/52 weeks with commits
9.4/18Commit volume — 10 commits in the last year
7/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Maintained — 9 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
commits_last_year10
human_commit_share1
days_since_last_push1
active_weeks_last_year2
How it's scored
27/27Ships releases — 7 releases published
36/36Release recency — latest release 2 days ago
19.8/27Release cadence — a release every ~116.1 days
0/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases — no data
Inputs used
releases_count7
latest_release_tagv0.10.0
releases_from_tagsno
days_since_latest_release2
mean_days_between_releases116.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): OpenSSF Scorecard: Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Community & Adoption

Does the project have users, downloads, attention, and a welcoming setup for contributors?

59Moderate · 17% of overall
How it's scored
33.4/60Stars — 116 stars
10.8/25Forks — 21 forks
5/15Watchers — 9 watchers
Inputs used
forks21
stars116
watchers9
growth_stateunverified
growth_factor_pct100
growth_unverified_reasonno_history
How it's scored
22.5/22.5README
22.5/22.5License — recognized license (Apache-2.0)
0/18CONTRIBUTING guide
0/13.5Code of conduct
0/7.2Issue template
0/6.3PR template
Inputs used
has_readmeyes
has_licenseyes
readme_badges4
has_contributingno
has_issue_templateno
has_code_of_conductno
readme_badge_servicesshields.io
has_pull_request_templateno
How it's scored
71.5/80Monthly downloads — 230,468 downloads/month across crates
0/20Registry dependents — not reported by this ecosystem
Inputs used
packagesvart
dependents—
ecosystemscrates
total_downloads1,966,435
monthly_downloads230,468
unverified_packages_excluded—
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Registry dependents. Remaining weights renormalized.

Sustainability & Governance

Will the project survive its people — bus factor, responsiveness, who backs it, and package upkeep?

77Good · 23% of overall
How it's scored
9/54Bus factor — 1 contributor(s) cover half of all commits
6.8/22.5Commit distribution — top contributor authored 70% of commits
10.8/13.5Contributor breadth — 8 contributors
6/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
Inputs used
bus_factor1
contributors_sampled8
top_contributor_share0.696
How it's scored
42/42Issue resolution — 100% of issues closed
24.3/30PR acceptance — 72/89 decided PRs merged
13/13Newcomer PR acceptance — 1/1 first-time contributors' PRs merged in 30d
10.5/15OpenSSF Scorecard: Code-Review — Found 22/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
Inputs used
merged_prs72
open_issues0
closed_issues7
prs_merged_7d1
prs_decided_7d4
prs_merged_30d1
prs_decided_30d4
issue_closed_ratio1
closed_unmerged_prs17
first_time_authors_30d1
first_time_prs_merged_30d1
first_time_prs_decided_30d1
How it's scored
30/30Ownership backing — organization-owned
20/20Verified domain
22.8/25Owner reach — 1,483 followers of surrealdb
25/25Track record — 135 public repos, account ~11 yr old
Inputs used
followers1,483
owner_typeOrganization
is_verifiedyes
owner_loginsurrealdb
public_repos135
account_age_days4,245

Package maintenance

100Exceptional
How it's scored
25/25Published & resolvable — 1 package(s) on crates
35/35Publish recency — latest publish 2 days ago
20/20Version history — 22 published versions
20/20Not deprecated — active, not deprecated or yanked
Inputs used
packagesvart
ecosystemscrates
any_deprecatedno
min_days_since_publish2

Engineering Quality

Are baseline engineering and documentation practices in place?

64Moderate · 19% of overall
How it's scored
24/24CI workflows — 4 workflow(s)
24/24Tests present
16/16Linter config — Cargo.toml ([lints])
0/9.6Pre-commit hooks
0/6.4.editorconfig
0/20OpenSSF Scorecard: CI-Tests — 2 out of 22 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
Inputs used
has_ciyes
has_testsyes
has_editorconfigno
has_linter_configyes
has_precommit_configno
How it's scored
30/30README
0/25Documentation directory
15/15Documentation / homepage site — https://surrealdb.com
10/10Repository description
10/10Topics — 7 topics
0/10Wiki
Inputs used
topicsadaptive-radix-tree, radix-tree, surreal, surrealdb, versioned, versioning, surrealkv
has_wikino
homepagehttps://surrealdb.com
docs_sitehttps://surrealdb.com
has_readmeyes
has_docs_dirno
has_descriptionyes

Security

Are visible security and supply-chain practices strong, without unresolved high-risk jurisdiction exposure?

68Good · 16% of overall
How it's scored
7.5/7.5Binary-Artifacts — no binaries found in the repo
4.5/7.5Branch-Protection — branch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0/2.5CI-Tests — 2 out of 22 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0/2.5CII-Best-Practices — no effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
5.2/7.5Code-Review — Found 22/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
1.5/2.5Contributors — project has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10/10Dangerous-Workflow — no dangerous workflow patterns detected
0/7.5Dependency-Update-Tool — no update tool detected
0/5Fuzzing — project is not fuzzed
2.5/2.5License — license file detected
5.2/7.5Maintained — 9 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 7
5/5Packaging — packaging workflow detected
5/5Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
0/5SAST — SAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
5/5Security-Policy — security policy file detected
0/7.5Signed-Releases — no data
0/7.5Token-Permissions — detected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
7.5/7.5Vulnerabilities — 0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Inputs used
sourceopenssf_scorecard
checks_evaluated17
scorecard_versionv5.5.0
checks_inconclusive1
scorecard_aggregate6.1
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Signed-Releases. Remaining weights renormalized.

Dependency advisories

100Exceptional
How it's scored
35/35Direct dependencies free of known advisories — no direct dependency carries a known advisory
0/25Indirect dependencies free of known advisories — transitive set not separable from development and test dependencies in this scope
0/40No advisories left outstanding — no advisory carries a publication date
Inputs used
sourceosv
advisories0
affected_packages0
assessed_packages95
unassessed_packages0
affected_by_severitynone
direct_affected_packages0
Excluded from scoring (no data or not applicable): Indirect dependencies free of known advisories, No advisories left outstanding. Remaining weights renormalized. Matched 95 resolved dependencies against OSV. This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so the repository dependency graph was assessed instead. That graph mixes development and test pins with shipped dependencies, so only the declared runtime dependencies are scored; transitive findings are reported as context and excluded from the score. Reachability is not analyzed.

AI Readiness

How well is the repo equipped to be developed and maintained with AI coding agents? Carries a deliberately small weight (4%): agent tooling is a real maintenance signal, but a repository with none can still reach 100/100.

75Good · 4% of overall
How it's scored
0/45Agent instructions — no CLAUDE.md / AGENTS.md / editor rules
15/15Machine-readable docs (llms.txt) — llms.txt served by the project website (https://surrealdb.com/llms.txt)
40/40Legible commit history — 65 of 73 human commits state their intent (structured subject or explanatory body)
Inputs used
has_llms_txtyes
llms_txt_urlhttps://surrealdb.com/llms.txt
legible_history_share0.89
agent_instruction_files—
agent_instruction_max_bytes—
How it's scored
18/18One-command bootstrap — Makefile
22/22Automated tests
11/11Lint / format config — Cargo.toml ([lints])
11/11Static type checking — Rust (statically typed)
10/10Reproducible environment — lockfile
2.7/10Demonstrated agent practice — 1 of the last 73 commits agent-authored or agent-credited
0/8Automated maintenance — no automated dependency updates observed
10/10OpenSSF Scorecard: Pinned-Dependencies — all dependencies are pinned
Inputs used
has_nixno
has_testsyes
lockfilesCargo.lock
has_dockerfileno
typed_languageyes
bootstrap_filesMakefile
has_devcontainerno
has_linter_configyes
typecheck_configs—
agent_commit_share0.014
toolchain_manifestsCargo.toml
dependency_bot_commit_share0
How it's scored
45/45Type-checkable code — Rust (statically typed)
42.8/55Manageable file sizes — 2/9 source files over 60KB
Inputs used
primary_languageRust
largest_source_bytes143,941
source_files_sampled9
oversized_source_files2

Key facts

116GitHub stars
8contributors
10commits, last 12 months
1days since last push
7releases
1bus factor
0open issues
crates.iopackage ecosystems

Data collection warnings

  • Star history unavailable: GitHub GraphQL error: Resource not accessible by personal access token

More detail

Star and fork history 0 ★ / 21 ⇿
0Stars
21Forks
6Releases

When each star and fork was added, collected from GitHub and bucketed by day. Cumulative growth sits directly above the daily additions it is made of, so the two read against each other: steady organic accretion looks nothing like an abrupt, short-lived burst. Where that difference is measurable, it is reported as growth authenticity.

048121620242112023-092025-012026-05
Major 0Minor 2Patch 4

Each point covers 3 days.

OpenSSF Scorecard 6.1 / 10
6.1aggregate

Independent, tool-agnostic security assessment from the open-source OpenSSF Scorecard. Each check rewards a security practice, not a specific vendor's tool. Checks Scorecard could not determine are marked n/a and excluded from the security score (never counted as zero).Scorecard v5.5.0 · 2026-09-28 02:53 UTC

10Binary-Artifactsno binaries found in the repo
6Branch-Protectionbranch protection is not maximal on development and all release branches
0CI-Tests2 out of 22 merged PRs checked by a CI test -- score normalized to 0
0CII-Best-Practicesno effort to earn an OpenSSF best practices badge detected
7Code-ReviewFound 22/30 approved changesets -- score normalized to 7
6Contributorsproject has 2 contributing companies or organizations -- score normalized to 6
10Dangerous-Workflowno dangerous workflow patterns detected
0Dependency-Update-Toolno update tool detected
0Fuzzingproject is not fuzzed
10Licenselicense file detected
7Maintained9 commit(s) and 0 issue activity found in the last 90 days -- score normalized to 7
10Packagingpackaging workflow detected
10Pinned-Dependenciesall dependencies are pinned
0SASTSAST tool is not run on all commits -- score normalized to 0
10Security-Policysecurity policy file detected
n/aSigned-Releasesno releases found
0Token-Permissionsdetected GitHub workflow tokens with excessive permissions
10Vulnerabilities0 existing vulnerabilities detected
Direct dependencies 1
RegistryPackageVersion constraintManifest
crates.iobyteslice0.1Cargo.toml
All dependencies 95

Full resolved dependency set from the GitHub dependency graph: 1 direct and 94 indirect (transitive) packages. The transitive closure is complete when the repository commits a lockfile.

RegistryPackageVersionRelation
crates.iobyteslice0.1.0direct
crates.ioaho-corasick1.1.5indirect
crates.ioanes0.1.6indirect
crates.ioanstyle1.0.14indirect
crates.ioarchery1.2.3indirect
crates.ioautocfg1.5.1indirect
crates.iobitflags2.13.2indirect
crates.iobumpalo3.20.3indirect
crates.iobytemuck1.25.2indirect
crates.iobytes1.12.1indirect
crates.iocast0.3.0indirect
crates.iocfg-if1.0.5indirect
crates.iociborium0.2.2indirect
crates.iociborium-io0.2.2indirect
crates.iociborium-ll0.2.2indirect
crates.ioclap4.6.7indirect
crates.ioclap_builder4.6.7indirect
crates.ioclap_lex1.1.1indirect
crates.iocondtype1.3.0indirect
crates.iocriterion0.5.1indirect
crates.iocriterion-plot0.5.0indirect
crates.iocrossbeam-deque0.8.8indirect
crates.iocrossbeam-epoch0.9.21indirect
crates.iocrossbeam-utils0.8.23indirect
crates.iocrunchy0.2.4indirect
crates.iodivan0.1.21indirect
crates.iodivan-macros0.1.21indirect
crates.ioeither1.18.0indirect
crates.ioequivalent1.0.2indirect
crates.ioerrno0.3.14indirect
crates.iofutures-core0.3.34indirect
crates.iofutures-task0.3.34indirect
crates.iofutures-util0.3.34indirect
crates.iogetrandom0.2.17indirect
crates.iohalf2.7.1indirect
crates.iohermit-abi0.5.3indirect
crates.ioimbl7.0.2indirect
crates.ioimbl-sized-chunks0.2.0indirect
crates.iois-terminal0.4.17indirect
crates.ioitertools0.10.5indirect
crates.ioitoa1.0.18indirect
crates.iojs-sys0.3.106indirect
crates.iolibc0.2.189indirect
crates.iolinux-raw-sys0.12.1indirect
crates.iomemchr2.8.3indirect
crates.ionum-traits0.2.19indirect
crates.ioonce_cell1.21.4indirect
crates.iooorandom11.1.5indirect
crates.iopin-project-lite0.2.17indirect
crates.ioplotters0.3.7indirect
crates.ioplotters-backend0.3.7indirect
crates.ioplotters-svg0.3.7indirect
crates.ioppv-lite860.2.21indirect
crates.ioproc-macro21.0.107indirect
crates.ioquote1.0.47indirect
crates.iorand0.8.8indirect
crates.iorand_chacha0.3.1indirect
crates.iorand_core0.6.4indirect
crates.iorand_core0.9.5indirect
crates.iorand_xoshiro0.7.0indirect
crates.iorayon1.12.0indirect
crates.iorayon-core1.13.0indirect
crates.ioregex1.13.1indirect
crates.ioregex-automata0.4.18indirect
crates.ioregex-lite0.1.9indirect
crates.ioregex-syntax0.8.11indirect
crates.iorustix1.1.5indirect
crates.iorustversion1.0.23indirect
crates.iosafe_arch0.7.4indirect
crates.iosame-file1.0.6indirect
crates.ioserde1.0.229indirect
crates.ioserde_core1.0.229indirect
crates.ioserde_derive1.0.229indirect
crates.ioserde_json1.0.151indirect
crates.ioslab0.4.12indirect
crates.iosyn2.0.119indirect
crates.iosyn3.0.6indirect
crates.ioterminal_size0.4.4indirect
crates.iotinytemplate1.2.1indirect
crates.iounicode-ident1.0.26indirect
crates.ioversion_check0.9.5indirect
crates.iowalkdir2.5.0indirect
crates.iowasi0.11.1+wasi-snapshot-preview1indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen0.2.129indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-macro0.2.129indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-macro-support0.2.129indirect
crates.iowasm-bindgen-shared0.2.129indirect
crates.ioweb-sys0.3.106indirect
crates.iowide0.7.33indirect
crates.iowinapi-util0.1.11indirect
crates.iowindows-link0.2.1indirect
crates.iowindows-sys0.61.2indirect
crates.iozerocopy0.8.59indirect
crates.iozerocopy-derive0.8.59indirect
crates.iozmij1.0.23indirect
Dependency advisories 0

This repository publishes no package the index resolves, so its own dependency graph was assessed — 95 packages, which also include development and test pins that never ship: 0 carry known advisories, of which 0 are direct.

No known advisories affect the assessed dependencies.

An advisory means the version recorded in the dependency graph falls inside an advisory’s affected range. Reachability is not analysed, and the graph includes development and test pins — a finding may concern tooling rather than shipped software.

Raw JSON report machine-readable

Feedback

Spotted something off in this report, or have thoughts to share? Wrong measurements, missed tooling, ideas, questions — anything is welcome. Every message is read and gets a response.

The message is kept through sign-in.

Scores are signals, not warranties. They reflect publicly visible practices on GitHub — not a code audit, and not a security guarantee.

Missing data is excluded and weights renormalized, never scored as zero. Methodology is versioned and open: metrics v2.10.0, schema v0.34.0 — full methodology · metrics wiki.

How one result sits in the wider record: aggregate statistics — crates.io.