Re: embedded/"serverless" (Re: serverless postgresql)

"Rick Gigger" <rick(at)alpinenetworking(dot)com> writes:
>> All of this explains why an embedded PostgreSQL isn't a great idea. It
>> being a true multi-user database means that even if you went though
>> all the work needed to turn it into an embedded database you wouldn't
>> get most of the advantages.

> Is it true that postgres is not suited for this and should not be used as
> such or is it just a matter of spending the time to allow you maybe compile
> an embedded version?

I think that Steve has it exactly right here. Postgres isn't designed
to be an embedded database in that sense, and none of the developers are
interested in moving it in that direction. It would require too many
compromises versus the full-fledged-server situation.

This is definitely a case where one size does not fit all. Rather
than trying to force-fit Postgres to an application it's not suited for,
you should use another product that is designed for that application.
In short: your time would be better spent on upgrading SQLite to do what
you need.

regards, tom lane