Edited out but the issue is it really is technically wrong. From a person that is actually building real world large scale applications this is super naive. There exists no networking hardware or disk IO that can adequately support this many active connections. What you really want to do is to do the same work with much less connections which will save you a ton of overhead and also memory that can be used to actually cache useful data.

My goal is to share this little bit of insight so that hopefully fewer people make this fatal mistake. Just because you can technically do something does not mean this is a good idea. If you need to run a million connections to the database instance you really need to rethink this entire problem.

I’m not sure I’d say anything is a “fatal mistake” if it works, and this appears to? Feels like you’re coming at this from “it’s suboptimal”, calling it a fatal mistake is a bit much?

I would look at it this way: Firstly, it’s just a demonstration of how far a technology can scale, not an endorsement of technical approach for the customers.

Secondly, on serverless, PlanetScale is just solving things their customers want? They don’t have a business if they don’t do that.

Finally, even if you are “right” or at least making a valid point, isn’t the “rethink this entire problem” take principled more than practical? There’s always 47 things to do and time only exists to do a few.