pgrx VS neon

Consider also the companies and work behind pgrx [0] and pgzx [1]:

[0] https://github.com/pgcentralfoundation/pgrx

[1] https://github.com/xataio/pgzx

If you like this (I do very much), you might also like pg_idkit[0] which is a little extension with a bunch of other kinds of IDs that you can generate inside PG, thanks to the seriously awesome pgrx[1] and Rust.

[0]: https://github.com/VADOSWARE/pg_idkit

[1]: https://github.com/pgcentralfoundation/pgrx

(disclosure, i work at supabase and have been developing TLEs with the RDS team)

Trusted Language Extensions refer to an extension written in any trusted language. In this case Rust, but it also includes: plpgsql, plv8, etc. See [0]

> PL/Rust is a more performant and more feature-rich alternative to PL/pgSQL

This is only partially true. plpgsql has bindings to low-level Postgres APIs, so in some cases it is just as fast (or faster) than Rust.

> Building a vector index (or any index for that matter) inside Postgres is a more involved process and can not be done via the UDF interface, be it Rust, C or PL/pgSQL

Most PG Rust extensions are written with the excellent pgrx framework [1]. While it doesn't have index bindings right now, I can certainly imagine a future where this is possible[2].

All that said - I think there are a lot of hoops to jump through right now and I doubt it's worth it for the Latern team. I think they are right to focus on developing a separate C extension

[0] TLE: https://supabase.com/blog/pg-tle

[1] pgrx: https://github.com/pgcentralfoundation/pgrx

[2] https://github.com/pgcentralfoundation/pgrx/issues/190#issue...

I’m currently playing with PostgreSQL, foreign data wrappers, and pgrx rust extensions. My development experience has been surprisingly smooth and enjoyable.

My main issue is that joins will be processed locally, so all the foreign data will be fetched before the join happens. But otherwise basic CRUD is easy.

https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Foreign_data_wrappers

https://github.com/pgcentralfoundation/pgrx

https://github.com/supabase/wrappers

I think maybe what you’re really looking for are the files here: https://github.com/pgcentralfoundation/pgrx/tree/c2eac033856...

Those are the internals we currently expose as unsafe “sys” bindings.

As we/contributors identify more that are desired we add them.

pgrx’ focus is on providing safe wrappers and general interfaces to the Postgres internals, which is the bulk of our work and is what will take many years.

As unsafe bindings go, we could just expose everything, and likely eventually will. There’s just some practical management concerns around doing that without a better namespace organization —- something we’ve been working.

The Postgres sources are not small. They are very complex, inconsistent in places, and often follow patterns that are specific to Postgres and not easy to generalize.

If you’ve never built an extension with pgrx, give it a shot one afternoon. It’s very exciting to see your own code running in your database.

pgrx is one of the greatest enabling innovations in the PG ecosystem in a long time.

Awesome to see so many high quality extensions come out of it.

https://github.com/pgcentralfoundation/pgrx

If you're interested in what my Threadripper 3970X does with it, there's some numbers in this PR: https://github.com/tcdi/pgrx/pull/1147

If you're reading this you probably got a really steep bill from Neon after finding yourself on their "Scale" plan. If you do want to stay with Neon but avoid surprise bills then go to the Plans page and choose what you actually want.

Such is the case with Neon, a serverless Postgres service, that went generally available on April 15. Congrats Nikita Shamgunov and team on the launch. When I saw the announcement, I knew I had to try it out for myself and report back with my findings.

I want to use this as a chance to bring attention to a GitHub issue that I think would help reduce friction for Neon:

https://github.com/neondatabase/neon/issues/4989

If the Neon driver were to allow us to easily pass in a localhost connection, the development and test experience would be easier. Perhaps Neon could swap to something like this internally: https://github.com/porsager/postgres.

Having run a local dev environment connected to Neon and tests connected to Neon got in our way of adoption. We'd prefer to develop and run tests against a regular Postgres localhost database.

To the PMs of Neon, put yourself in the shoes of a new developer thinking of giving Neon a try. What changes will I have to make to my code and my development workflow?

Neon is an open source and cloud-native serverless database platform that focuses on simplicity and ease of use. It supports Postgres databases and offers built-in features like bottomless storage, autoscaling, and branching.

For MySQL, we've got PlanetScale, and for PostgreSQL, there's Neon.

8. https://neon.tech/As you might know not one tool fits all, I still have strong preferences for the following. It helps me get going faster and get things done right first time and helps in ease of maintenance.

Language: Typescript.

Migrated away when they removed the free tier, ended up using https://neon.tech/

Cool! At Neon[0], I work full time on our custom postgres proxy[1]. It's a very nice protocol to work with, although our usecase is quite a bit more complex compared to the ideas presented in the post.

Neon databases scale to zero, so the proxy needs to spin up databases on the fly. The proxy doesn't do that but it knows if the databases is running and asks our control plane to schedule it if it isn't. It's a fun service to maintain.

The biggest pain is error handling. Postgres is really bad for error messages and codes. The only available code we can use is usually protocol violation...

[0]: https://neon.tech/

Neon - PostgreSQL