nih-syndrome is a real thing. I'm not saying they don't make cool stuff but the engineering culture that prioritizes creating a new database over using something that already exists, then promoting the people who develop the (70th) new DB over the people who were focused on actually delivering value for the customer, it's not my choice in working environment.
The architecture where all the magic lives in the database layer and the services treat the DB like this magical thing that synchronizes across multiple DCs for you, and takes care of every complicated part of engineering a distributed system is a "now you have two problems" situation. It's a massive complicated system that will fail in novel ways, and you don't have a large community of other users that you can fall back on for expertise.
> you don't have a large community of other users that you can fall back on for expertise.
That is one of the most important points of consideration when I am being asked to asses new tech. If the project is not actively supported by the community, I don't recommend it. I just can't expose the client to risk just because there's a new shiny thing.
The architecture where all the magic lives in the database layer and the services treat the DB like this magical thing that synchronizes across multiple DCs for you, and takes care of every complicated part of engineering a distributed system is a "now you have two problems" situation. It's a massive complicated system that will fail in novel ways, and you don't have a large community of other users that you can fall back on for expertise.