kiwicopple

hey - supabase ceo/cofounder here. Please tell your little sister that I’m happy supabase could be a small part of her builder journey, and good luck with her app. My email is in my bio if she has any product feedback

Fwiw we wouldn’t take legal action but sometimes we politely reach out if the name could cause confusion for customers - everyone has been very amicable and usually it’s a win/win to rename anyhow

(supabase cofounder) reach out if you need any help integrating. contact details are in my profile

(supabase employee)

confirming that we're still working hard on this. aiming to be production-ready this year. benchmarks and compatibility testing are on track

Yes that’s how it will work. The transition will be seamless

> Supabase is another one that was cool, but now it is in the AI abyss.

(supabase ceo) I'm curious what gives you this impression? it's true that a lot of platforms build on top of Supabase, but our focus is still just building the best Postgres platform we can (OrioleDB, Multigres, etc)

admittedly we've also had to shift a lot of our tooling to things like Claude/Codex, but that's more reflective of how people are building now

clarifying a few misconceptions:

> RLS policies are executed per row

not necessarily. the planner integrates the policy expression into the query plan. stable/immutable expressions and indexable predicates aren't naively re-evaluated per row

> If SET LOCAL is omitted, current_setting() returns an empty string or throws an error depending on how your policy is written

if you're using tools like PostgREST, they set the GUC automatically per request

> RLS policies themselves are stored in pg_policies inside your database, not in your source code

Policies are plain DDL and are tracked by every serious migration tool. Off the top of my head, these tools track Policies: Sqitch, Flyway, Alembic, Atlas, Prisma migrate, dbmate

> Most migration tools do not include SQL functions

same as above

> Why is there no InnoDB for PostgreSQL?

(we maintain OrioleDB) Mostly because the TAM API isn't mature enough yet. Hopefully we can upstream more patches so that it's possible

> undo-based MVCC storage engine project stall?

From what I could gather, it ran out of steam simply because of the difficulty of the task. There is a lot of work involved to get the requisite patches into core and the community are (correctly) cautious