> Another consideration is that, at scale, no sql is way cheaper.
Define "scale" and "cheaper".
I have some SQLite databases that are chewing through over 1K writes per second in production (WAL=on). Many of our transactions resolve within 10-100 microseconds because the application process and the database process are the same thing.
SQLite seems to be one of the cheapest options available, being totally free and of negligible footprint. It's also exceedingly cheap in terms of engineering complexity and scary unknowns. Something about being literally the most deployed piece of software on earth seems to help.
NoSQL reads like a religion to me these days. Starting with something that is actively trying to tear itself apart due to the inherent complexity seems like a horrible way to build a 5 user POC.
Define "scale" and "cheaper".
I have some SQLite databases that are chewing through over 1K writes per second in production (WAL=on). Many of our transactions resolve within 10-100 microseconds because the application process and the database process are the same thing.
SQLite seems to be one of the cheapest options available, being totally free and of negligible footprint. It's also exceedingly cheap in terms of engineering complexity and scary unknowns. Something about being literally the most deployed piece of software on earth seems to help.
NoSQL reads like a religion to me these days. Starting with something that is actively trying to tear itself apart due to the inherent complexity seems like a horrible way to build a 5 user POC.