that's a reductio ad absurdum, the opposite of which would be adjusting our clocks by some seconds every day so the sun would always rise at 6:00:00 AM. both extremes are equally neat in some way and painfully inconvenient in many others.
While a thread-per-connection seems like an improvement, do you have any plans to allow query multiplexing over a single connection? That would be a huge improvement IMO.
Can you elaborate on the use case for query multiplexing? Is it so your client would only need to establish one connection with Postgres and then could run as many queries as it wanted?
Microsoft SQL Server has had a similar feature for a while -- Multiple Active Result Sets aka MARS. I don't have a good read on whether it actually helps any workloads. I've seen adapters that don't support it because of the extra complication.
Multiplexing would have a number of benefits. As you say, each client would only need a single connection regardless of the number of queries being sent. Resulting in:
On the client side, there is usually a local connection pool. When a burst of traffic comes in, the client needs to either wait for the pool to free up or establish a new connection, which adds latency. This latency hit wouldn’t occur with multiplexing.
With multiplexing, systems like pgbouncer would be unnecessary.
Also, even with a thread-per-connection, you can still quickly exhaust the servers resources when you have lots of connections because threads have a lot of overhead. Reducing the number of connections needed would greatly increase the number of clients that a database can serve.
> You may have heard that if you have an MTHFR variant, you should avoid folic acid and should take other types of folate, such as 5-MTHF. However, this is not true. People with an MTHFR gene variant can process all types of folate, including folic acid. Folic acid is the only type of folate shown to help prevent neural tube defects (NTDs).
Linking to a huge list of supplement guidelines, most of which cover labeling of nutrient content is not helpful. I did try to dig in, however, and found this:
> A qualified health claim is supported by less scientific evidence than an authorized health claim. FDA requires that qualified claims be accompanied by a disclaimer that explains the level of the scientific evidence supporting the relationship.
> Unlike authorized health claims, FDA does not issue regulations for qualified health claims.
That does seem to indicate supplement manufacturers have broad latitude to make claims provided they are disclosed as such.
On the other hand, Blind Assassin was extremely boring to me until the very last page, but that last page blew my mind.
reply