HN user

osbre

58 karma

19 y.o dev from Ukraine. Passionate about indie-hacking, web development and open-source.

meet.hn/city/51.148555,0.8722566/Ashford

Socials:

- github.com/osbre

---

Posts3
Comments11
View on HN

Many website-blocking or "focus" extensions show pop-ups and do all sorts. I just wanted something simple, a set-and-forget kind of thing.

This extension blocks distracting homepages but still lets you in for pages from search or links.

But wouldn't using a connection pool solve this problem of "stressing out the database"? I assumed a single connection from the pool would be considered "occupied" until we hear back from the database.

Or are you saying that processing lots of requests/tasks in Rails while waiting for the database would quickly eat up all the CPU? It seems like a good thing - "resource utilization" = servers should do things whenever possible rather than just waiting. Although now that I think about it you'd only want maximum resource utilization if your database is on a separate server.

More concurrency is not always ideal

Is this due to increased memory usage? Does the same apply to Sidekiq if it was powered by Fibers?