> The latency reductions are only for pure read traffic. Well, no, because every insert will still be fast (until there's too many). It does not block until it

> The latency reductions are only for pure read traffic. Well, no, because every insert will still be fast (until there's too many). It does not block until it's written to e.g. s3. So there's a window, let's say 1 second, of potential data loss. I assume syncing the wal to s3 is much faster than inserting to sqlite, so it will never fall behind, but I have not tested. > Also, every company I ever worked at had a policy to run at least two instances of a service in case of hardware failure. Yeah, but the goal is not to have X instances, the goal is to limit downtime. In my experience the complicated setups have downtime as well, often related to how complicated they are. In my mind a setup like this would only be used where some downtime is OK. But that's quite common.