Message-ID: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-2325-c4143243754@github.com>
From: "vlsi (@vlsi)" <noreply+vlsi@github.com>
To: "pgjdbc/pgjdbc" <noreply+pgjdbc-pgjdbc@github.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2026 15:00:37 +0000
Subject: Re: [pgjdbc/pgjdbc] issue #2325: Support pipelining queries
In-Reply-To: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-2325@github.com>
References: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc-2325@github.com>
List-Id: <gh-pgjdbc-pgjdbc.github.com>
X-GitHub-Author-Login: vlsi
X-GitHub-Comment-Id: 4143243754
X-GitHub-Comment-Type: issue_comment
X-GitHub-Issue: 2325
X-GitHub-Repo: pgjdbc/pgjdbc
X-GitHub-Type: comment
X-GitHub-Url: https://github.com/pgjdbc/pgjdbc/issues/2325#issuecomment-4143243754
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

> connection between different non-virtual threads didn't seem like a good idea to me

> whereas with virtual threads it feels more natural

Why so?

I do not understand why sharing a connection between virtual threads should look any better than sharing connections between regular threads.

PS PostgreSQL backend semantics is "any failure kills the transaction". So, if a single SQL fails, all subsequent SQLs would fail as well until commit/rollback. That means, if virtual threads are unrelated, a single problematic would kill the results for all the others.