flame VS libcluster_postgres

Probably not too much to say that’s specific to FLAME. Closures are serializable and can be sent as messages to actors on the BEAM.

From a quick look at the code, this looks the magic line: https://github.com/phoenixframework/flame/blob/main/lib/flam...

However, when it comes to connecting the servers, there seems to be a barrier of entry that many people encounter, including ourselves, on how to provide the name discovery required to connect said servers. We have released our approach to solving this problem by open-sourcing libcluster Postgres Strategy and today, we explore the motivations behind its creation and the methodologies employed in its development.

Ah, that makes a lot of sense - I think the FLAME.Parent{} approach may enable backends that wouldn't be possible otherwise.

For example, if I used the heroku api to do the equivalent of ps:scale to boot up more nodes - those new nodes (dynos in heroku parlance) could see what kind of pool members they are. I don't think there is a way to do dyno specific env vars - they apply at the app level.

If anyone tries to do a Heroku backend before I do, an alternative might be to use distinct process types in the Procfile for each named pool and ps:scale those to 0 or more.

Also, might need something like Supabase's libcluster_postgres[1] to fully pull it off.

[1] https://github.com/supabase/libcluster_postgres