On Mon, Jan 22, 2024 at 11:43 PM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinn...@iki.fi> wrote:
> On 22/01/2024 21:58, Vladimir Churyukin wrote: > > A question about protocol design - would it be possible to extend the > > protocol, so it can handle multiple startup / authentication messages > > over a single connection? Are there any serious obstacles? (possible > > issues with re-initialization of backends, I guess?) > > If that is possible, it could improve one important edge case - where > > you have to talk to multiple databases on a single host currently, you > > need to open a separate connection to each of them. In some cases > > (multitenancy for example), you may have thousands of databases on a > > host, which leads to inefficient connection utilization on clients (on > > the db side too). A lot of other RDBMSes don't have this limitation. > > The protocol and the startup message are the least of your problems. > Yeah, it would be nice if you could switch between databases, but the > assumption that one backend operates on one database is pretty deeply > ingrained in the code. Yes, I suspected that's the reason why it was not implemented so far, but what's the main problem there? Is the issue with the global data cleanup / re-initialization after the database is changed? Is it in 3rd party extensions that assume the same and may break? Anything else? -Vladimir Churyukin
