That’s when you remember: Postgres isn’t the problem. Your proxy is. Or more precisely, your proxy’s way of handling the Postgres binary protocol and user groups. If you’ve ever tried to scale database connections, route by tenant, or secure multi-tenant access without breaking latency budgets, you already know how deep this rabbit hole can go.
The Postgres binary protocol is both brilliant and unforgiving. It’s what allows fast client-server communication without wasting bytes on text formatting overhead. But proxying it isn’t as simple as passing packets along. Each state transition — startup, authentication, parameter parsing, query parsing, data streaming — is tightly sequenced. If your proxy doesn’t parse and track this state with precision, you get mysterious connection drops, broken prepared statements, and authentication loops.
Adding user group logic makes it more interesting. Commonly, user groups in Postgres are implemented as roles with inheritance. At the proxy level, though, you can enforce group-based rules before a single SQL statement reaches the database. This is faster, keeps the database simpler, and can centralize access policies. When you combine this with binary protocol proxying, you can authenticate once at the proxy, assign the connection to a user group context, and let the proxy rewrite parameters or reject queries based on policy — all without extra round trips.
The challenge? The proxy must multiplex and demultiplex traffic from many clients, each mapped to a user group, while keeping the Postgres backend connections healthy and in the right state. This demands deep protocol awareness: handling AuthenticationCleartextPassword, AuthenticationMD5Password, SCRAM, SSL negotiation, and more — all while maintaining consistent transaction boundaries.