This HN thread is already full of people saying "this looks brittle", "maintenance nightmare", &c. because the README spends so long trying to convince you that this product is a huge, multifaceted kitchen sink. People want simplicity, noone is looking for a plethora of things they need to run, why would you ever try and sell anything as that?
Most of the "features" they enumerate are either:
- optional pg extensions that are available in normal pg by default
- orchestration software that one might use to deploy HA pg clusters in a distributed / k8s type env anyway (i.e. it's not extra, it's just your underlying infra templates - e.g. Terraform, Patroni, &c.)
The only thing I really see there that is "not-really-needed-kitchen-sink-extras" is the observability stack (grafana, loki, &c.)
RDS is a managed service. This is a code repo. It is useless until you deploy it at which point... it's no longer free. Then you have to manage it yourself and deal with the overhead yourself.
This is like saying I can fire my gardener because you have a free gardener alternative, and then handing me a pair of scissors. I now have all the problems that I paid the Gardener to solve.
Likewise, we pay AWS to manage all the headaches that deploying this would introduce. And trust me, if you are running databases at scale in production, then RDS feels very affordable considering the problems it solves.
Most folks should use RDS etc. (Yes, it's expensive and has limitations.)
If you need or want to self-host, you need to understand every moving part and how they fit together. The effort and knowledge required to assemble your own setup are essential, and outsourcing them to a magic bundle would be a mistake.
Curious if there are runtime downsides to having so many extensions installed
Is this intended as a prototyping tool?