[fidrelity]

Serious follow-up question: So the difference between 'managed' and 'serverless' databases is that for the former I know some level of infrastructure (CPU, RAM, size, etc.) whereas for the latter it's completely hidden and priced in?

I was also only aware of your first definition of serverless.

[gwen-shapira]

Serverless isn't just hidden and priced in - it is supposed to scale automatically with your use.

AWS Lambda lets you think about "invocations" and not CPU and you trust that the CPU will show up when needed. At Nile we hope to let you focus on "queries per sec" and even "queries per second per tenant" while we scale the infrastructure as needed for you.

Incidentally, our product has a dashboard that shows you exactly these metrics :)

[fidrelity]

But in reality those limits don't disappear, they just get buried deeper, hidden in the docs somewhere.

AWS Lambda has a default concurrency limit of 1k and each function has a configurable memory limit.

Sure, those limits allow for a lot more elasticity and flexible pricing but the limitations haven't disappeared.

Also, there are now some 'serverless' hosting providers that do fixed monthly pricing (fermyon.com/pricing). Isn't this taking the best part of serverless ad absurdum or is there something I'm missing?

Lastly, I hope I don't sound argumentative. I work for a company that has the described problem of multi-tenant SaaS and I love Postgres, so I am fully supportive of your mission!

[mason55]

Yes. If you look at, for example, Amazon's offerings, this is how they use the terms.