For me, it might remove some blockers to moving some clients to a cloud managed database solution that had always been there with AWS RDS. If that follows through and pays off for having a proper PostgreSQL super user in the database environment available for use (what I really want), that can make certain things much more do-able (brings new things you have to watch out for, too, but... pick your battles).
The admin user provisioned for the server is not a full superuser, but it is close to that. We are trying to find the right set of permissions to provide to our customers without jeopardizing our ability to manage this server for you. Please submit your feedback here: https://feedback.azure.com/forums/597976-azure-database-for-... if you see a problem with the permissions.
Thank you for your feedback. We indeed offer a whole server (database cluster) and you can create multiple databases in it and have full control of the resources allocated to that cluster.
I'll give it a try. It may well be permissive enough for our my clients' needs; though plv8 would still be a blocker (already voted on that one).
Shared or not is absolutely an assumption on my part. If they're spinning up an individual cluster for you, then some of the restrictions on RDS don't make much sense to me. They make more sense if it were shared.
Unfortunately, for most of the clients I work with, the limits (shared or not) are show-stoppers so I've only dealt with building a system backed by AWS RDS/PostgreSQL once and the need to dive into the underlying mechanics just wasn't there at the time.
The limitations are presumably so that they have control over settings for things like replication and their features that you can't mess with.