I'm going to sound like a broken record but... different use cases. They're analogous in the comparison "sqlite for analytics" but completely different architectures and implementations. Part of this is the fault of the developers, but I feel they were trying to highlight the similar focus on in-process, zero dependencies, simplicity and test coverage - not a direct "vs" comparison. IME recursive queries in analytical workflows are not very common; they typically work against the fundamental data layout on disk.

SQLite is awesome and I would love to see more posts about it, but the reality is one of the major reasons it's awesome is the no-drama/stability/it just works. DuckDB is seeing a lot of development on many fronts so there's a lot more to learn and talk about right now.

> while DuckDB effectively appeared on the scene two years ago.

duckdb is ~7 years old by now. it was quite popular long before it became 1.0. heck, even motherduck has been founded 4 years ago.

> DuckDB is fast for some specific workloads

Yes, it's specifically promoted as DBMS for OLAP workload. And it's usually compared to ClickHouse, another analytical DBMS. So people who use it know why it's good.