[AgharaShyam]

In addition to infrequent access type use-cases, the ability to trivially create new DBs without incurring significant costs is the killer feature.

This makes it feasible to build multi-tenant applications with 1-db-per-tenant. I know the same can be achieved with RLS policies or application-layer permissions, but nothing beats the peace mind (for developer and customers alike) of having tenant data in entirely separate databases. This also makes it easier to have custom schema for different subsets of users. Side note: SQLite (the OG serverless DB) also has the same benefit but is decidedly less feature-full than postgres/mysql.

Another pattern that I have seen emerging is that certain products allow end-users to create DBs on the fly as a part of their own product offering. For example, Retool (which uses Neon) allows users to create a new database in seconds, even on their free plan. I don't think this would have been possible (both cost and DX wise) if they provisioned a new Postgres cluster for each customer.

On that note, and in light of what happened with the Planetscale free plan, this would make the Supabase free offering and branching to be significantly less expensive to operate. btw: thank you for the free plan and all the amazing OSS contributions from the supabase team!!