[siscia]

Honestly, I believe that for small workload you can definitely use RediSQL in production, it will happily contain your cache or it will be a great SQL database.

However, I need a way to cut it between people just using the free product and people actually supporting the project, so provide as paying feature something that the big company will require it seemed to me the only way to go.

Unfortunately, I don't have the capital nor the bandwidth to go with fully open source product and selling just support, which I don't believe is anyway a good business model.

If you were in my shoes, you would do something different?

[jexah]

I haven't followed any links posted in this thread, but some things I see often are: free for non-commercial use, timed commercial use usually in the region of 30 days, or rates based on reads and writes. The last one seems like a winner from what you've described as your situation.

[ddorian43]

To be honest, I fail to see what I could use your product for so I'm out of the target audience.

Assuming nosql is for something very efficient or very scalable, I need some space to use it before I have to shell $$. There are many products where I have to pay before going on production.

[siscia]

It really depends on what you are building.

If I were building a fast prototype I would not use a postgres box anymore but just a redis one.

If you need to cache data in a way more complex than just key->value you don't have too many alternatives at the moment.

If you want an easy and fast way to have an SQL engine in memory, again is not going to be simple.

If you need a separated database for every of your user there are no many alternatives that I am aware of.

It is definitely not a revolutionary product, but it has it's niche, any of the problems that I mentioned can be solved in a different way, but those different ways are quite complex.