@supabase developers, is this a reasonable way to do things or am I missing something?
For example, we have a lot of people who use Prisma with Supabase, rather than the APIs we provide.
1. Faster user experience, the user isn't waiting for the business logic to complete, inserting in the queue should only take a couple of milliseconds.
2. It's more secure, the web worker can have minimal privileges (INSERT only on the queue table) but the backend workers can have much more privilege because they are not user facing.
3. You can scale the web workers orthogonal to the queue workers, as they'll likely have very different scaling properties.
Supabase also has a WAL decoding tool called WALRUS that I have not tried yet, and that could be the most efficient approach going forward. The tradeoff with queue tables is that the tables are persistent and a bit more resilient to failure/retry.
I haven't had time to work on it myself until recently, but I brought up the idea of making that bit a separate library (and I understand that the Supabase folks are super busy).
https://github.com/supabase/realtime/issues/146#issue-874855...
But the other consideration is that you likely need to do a lot with a reverse-proxy like traefik to have much control of what you are really exposing to the outside world. PostgREST is not Spring, it doesn't have explicit control over every little thing so you're likely to need something in front of it. Anyway, point is that having a simple Flask server with a few endpoints running wouldn't complicate the architecture very much b/c you are better off with something in front of it doing routing already (and ssl termination, etc).