Is MySQL more scalable than PostgreSQL due to the difference in how they handle connections?

I’m trying to decide if either MySQL or PostgreSQL would be more suitable for an application that will get hit by potentially thousands of simultaneous requests at a time.

During research, one fact that stands out is that PostgreSQL forks a new process for each connection, whereas MySQL creates a new thread to handle each connection.

  • Does this mean that MySQL is more efficient than PostgreSQL at handling many concurrent connections?

  • How much of an impact does this difference have on how well both systems scale? Is it something that I should worry about to begin with?

What is the difference between a Whip and Scorpion Whip? [duplicate]

I’m building a whip character, and one of the class features I get allows me to pick one exotic light or one-handed melee weapon that has the disarm or trip special feature and become proficient with it. I get this from the Magus archetype Spire Defender. I like the fact that the scorpion whip allows me to deal lethal damage, regardless of natural armor and armor, but its description confuses me.

A whip is a exotic light weapon, and a scorpion whip is a exotic one-handed weapon.

Whip

A whip deals no damage to any creature with an armor bonus of +1 or higher or a natural armor bonus of +3 or higher. The whip is treated as a melee weapon with 15-foot reach, though you don’t threaten the area into which you can make an attack. In addition, unlike most other weapons with reach, you can use it against foes anywhere within your reach (including adjacent foes).

Using a whip provokes an attack of opportunity, just as if you had used a ranged weapon.

You can use the Weapon Finesse feat to apply your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to attack rolls with a whip sized for you, even though it isn’t a light weapon.

Weapon Feature(s): finesse, reach.

Scorpion Whip

Benefit: It deals lethal damage, even to creatures with armor bonuses. If you are proficient with both scorpion whips and whips, you can use a scorpion whip in either the normal way, as a typical light performance weapon, or as a whip.

If you are proficient with both the scorpion whip and whip, you can use a scorpion whip in either the normal way (as a light performance weapon) or as a whip. When you use a scorpion whip as a whip, it is equivalent to a whip, but deals lethal damage and can harm creatures regardless of their armor bonus.

Weapon Feature(s): performance (plus disarm, reach, and trip if you are proficient with whip.)

Performance

When wielding this weapon, if an attack or combat maneuver made with this weapon prompts a combat performance check, you gain a +2 bonus on that check. See Gladiator Weapons below for more information.

So what is the normal way of a light performance weapon, and how exactly does that differ from a whip?

Difference in light between Unity 5.5.2f1 and Unity 2019

The lighting is different between Unity 5.5.2f1 and Unity 2019. Please see the attached image.enter image description here

I dislike the way the lighting is done in the 2019 version. Both verions are installed out of the box, without any additions.

What do I need to change / set up inside Unity 2019, in order to have the exact lighting as in 5.5.2f1 version?

Is there a meaningful difference between giving a monster multiattack and giving it multiple turns per round?

I’m creating a CR21 boss for my medium-level party of six players to fight. I know that action economy is a big disadvantage for a single enemy fighting an entire party, so I’m giving the boss the ability to attack 4 times per turn (20-35 damage per most attacks).

I know the most common way to give a creature multiple attacks is to give it Multiattack, an action that allows it to use its attack abilities several times in one go. I’m considering instead rolling initiative for the boss 4 times and giving it a whole turn for each initiative value, giving it 4 separate attacks.

Will this have a significantly different effect on the battle than giving the boss a standard multiattack?


A couple thoughts I’ve had:

  • This allows the boss to use more bonus actions per round. The boss I’m designing doesn’t have any nonstandard bonus actions, so I don’t think this will make a big difference.
  • This allows the boss to move more often. I’ve divided the speed I want the boss to have by the number of turns it gets per round, so its total movement per round will be the same.
  • This gives the boss more reactions. I can see this making it quite a but more difficult. I’m not planning on using many reactions when I play the boss, though.

Difference between a Magus Variant, and a Skeletal Champion variant

So, while looking through the template options for skeletons and animate dead, one of the listed options is the magus.

Magus: These variant skeletal champions and zombie lords are minor spellcasters (typically 5th-level or less) that have retained both their intelligence and their spellcasting abilities. Magus skeletons and zombies gain Silent Spell as a bonus feat. (CR +1 plus caster level)

This variant is the only one without an example. Looking at it, it seems pretty abstract. It looks like it may even be argued to fall under Create Undead instead of animate dead. However Create undead has the Skeletal champion template, which already retains class levels and intelligence and even gives extra HD that the magus doesnt seem to.

My question is, which spell creates a Magus skeleton, and if it is create undead, are they basically an extra free feat for the champion? If its animate undead, are they mostly mindless save for their spell casting ability? What is retained?

Difference between shader input element classification between D3D12 and Vulkan

I’m confused about the difference between the shader input element classifications in D3D12 and Vulkan. For example, in Vulkan I could have the following declarations:

struct vertex {     glm::vec3 pos;     glm::vec3 col; };  VkVertexInputBindingDescription input_binding_description {     .binding = 0,     .stride = sizeof(vertex),     .inputRate = VK_VERTEX_INPUT_RATE_VERTEX };  std::array<VkVertexInputAttributeDescription, 2> input_attribute_descriptions {     VkVertexInputAttributeDescription{         .location = 0,         .format = VK_FORMAT_R32G32B32_SFLOAT,         .offset = offsetof(vertex, pos)     },         VkVertexInputAttributeDescription{         .location = 1,         .format = VK_FORMAT_R32G32B32_SFLOAT,         .offset = offsetof(vertex, col)     } }; 

Here the input rate is specified per vertex and not per attribute. On the other hand, in D3D12, we would have

struct Vertex {     XMFLOAT3 pos;     XMFLOAT3 col; };  std::array<D3D12_INPUT_ELEMENT_DESC, 2> input_element_descs = {     { "POSITION", 0, DXGI_FORMAT_R32G32B32_FLOAT, 0, 0,     D3D12_INPUT_CLASSIFICATION_PER_VERTEX_DATA, 0 },     { "COLOR", 0, DXGI_FORMAT_R32G32B32_FLOAT, 0, 12,     D3D12_INPUT_CLASSIFICATION_PER_VERTEX_DATA, 0 } }; 

And as you can see, the input rate is specified per attribute. Why is that? Is there a difference between the meaning of the input classification in D3d12 and Vulkan that I’m missing? I’m not familiar with D3D12, but at first glance, it doesn’t make sense to me to have different input classifications for the attributes of a vertex.