Re: Async client libraries - not worth it?

On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 07:35, Rob Nikander <rob(dot)nikander(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:

>
>
> On Jun 17, 2019, at 1:12 PM, Dave Cramer <pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com> wrote:
>
> https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=data-r17&hw=ph&test=db
>
> Seems to be worth it.
>
> Now it appears that ADBA is going to die on the vine, R2DBC and vertx seem
> to be pretty good
>
>
> The “async” frameworks are faster, but I think they might be getting the
> performance gain not from the async DB API, but from the fact that they
> don’t block OS threads that are handling frontend HTTP requests. They may
> be using an async DB API to achieve that, but they *could* (I think) also
> use traditional JDBC and other general purpose concurrency tools from
> Java’s standard library. That way would be easier to reason about, in my
> opinion.
>
> I may just have to write something both ways and wait to get real world
> experience with it to see how it goes.
>
>
Yes, the async framework is faster, but ultimately they have to return
something from the database which effectively makes them "block". Postgres
can pipeline requests if the client is written correctly so it is
conceivable that this would be much faster.

Dave