[mrkeen]

> ACID transactions and database constraints make this kind of consistency easier to achieve than many alternatives.

If your company only runs one database.

> It's also easier to prove correctness

RDBMSs are wonderful and I don't consider them unreliable at all. But I can't prove the correctness of my teammate's actions. I want them to show their working by putting their updates onto an append-only ledger.

[jacques_chester]

> If your company only runs one database.

I think the same argument can be made with "only one Kafka cluster" and "only one blockchain".

[lmm]

> I think the same argument can be made with "only one Kafka cluster"

No it can't. Kafka events for the same partition will always be processed in order. If you have a stream transformation that reads from a topic that lives in one cluster and writes to a topic that lives in another cluster, then (as long as you chose the right partition key) everything will work correctly. Even if you have a sequence of transformations that zig-zag between two different clusters, it will do the right thing. You can't achieve that with traditional databases.