Please explain how you intend to use different models for reading and writing without there being some temporal separation between the two?

Most all CQRS designs have some read view or projection built off consuming the write side.

If this is not the case, and you're just writing your "read models" in the write path; where is the 'S' from CQRS (s for segregation). You wouldn't have a CQRS system here. You'd just be writing read optimised data.

▲

azkalam 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

- Write side is a Postgres INSERT

- Read side is a SELECT on a Postgres view

▲

zknill an hour ago | parent [-]

I think you might struggle to "scale the read and write sides independently".

It's a real stretch to be describing a postgres view as CQRS

	▲	andersmurphy 18 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Sqlite can scale CQRS to 100000 events per second on a relatively small VPS. That's 10x what the author achieves with postgres. You can scale them independently in that you can control the rate at which your views are read and the batch size of your updates. The whole big win wirh CQRS is it allows for very efficient batching.
	▲	anthonylevine an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Huh? That's EXACTLY what CQRS. I think you might struggle to understand CQRS.

▲

2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

anthonylevine an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> Most all CQRS designs have some read view or projection built off consuming the write side.

This is flat out false.