Pretty sure you could have said the same in 1986 and I know for sure you could have in 2006. Not sure why you think people having different tastes is new.
Ok ... you know PostgreSQL supports hash tables in shared memory, right? PostgreSQL could in theory share those if we wanted to. The issue is just that coding anything which uses shared memory is a lot of work.
Additionally the reasons PostgreSQL does not offer Clickhouse performance has very little to do with parallelism. PostgreSQL plans to move to threading but the efforts around imporving OLAP performance are almost entirely unrelated.
I strongly disagree. The easiest way to shut down your business is to insist on being 100% secure because the only way to have perfect security is to do nothing.
Funny story but in my experience hardware engineers produce some of the worst software of the industry. Of course there must be some hardware engineers out there who do hood software but generally what they build are disasters.
Some, but not that much. Switching PostgreSQL to a threaded model will not magically make spawning connections fast. PostgreSQL connections are quite heavyweight.
The reason to use threads is almost entirely about ease of development, not about performance. If you use shrared memory like PostgreSQL does you need to write your own allocators, etc. So much you get for free if you use threads.
Threads does not offer any major performance advantage, performance of processes vs threads is virtually the same. The reason the PostgreSQL project is moving towards threads is to make development easier.
It is not like you typically can just ignore a court order so Google will need to convince Klarna that they have changed something or Klarna can just go back to the court.
I agree with your first part but your edit is a logic fallacy. I don't need to be able to hack something to say that it is insecure.
For example: I don't know how to exploit SAML but I know it is a terrible standard dur to making all of the XML parser an attack surface. I am not a security researcher so I dont know how to find exploits in XML parsers but I know having a huge attack surface is bad.
Other than coal gas being not very efficient use of coal what was so bad about it? Stockholm still had coal gas in the early 2000s and accidental carbon monoxide poisoning was very rare. Of course the alternatives are better, but only marginally so.
It is also a bit tricky tradeoff. You do not want to be stuck with the same data format forever. So databases like MySQL and PostgreSQL need a downtime when doing a major version upgrade. They both try to keep it short, usually seconds, but minutes can happen in either database.