I could see them building something RDS-like on their own, but if they're trying to go further than that I wonder if they'll buy or partner with other companies rather than doing it themselves. Neon strikes me as a Postgres-as-a-service that could pair well with Fly.
> The second problem we have with Postgres was a poor choice on my part. We decided to ship “unmanaged Postgres” to buy ourselves time to wait for the right managed Postgres provider to show up.
> We’re going to solve managed Postgres. It’s going to take a while to get there, but it’s a core component of the infrastructure stack and we can’t afford to pretend otherwise.
+1 to Neon seeming like a good fit, but it's also very much a beta (alpha?) both as a product and company (at least from my impression). I'm not sure that's a bet they'd want to make right now given the context of this post.
We are launching our paid tier March 15th and will be production ready shortly after. We are running 20K+ databases and measuring reliability and uptime.
Generally reliability is a function of architecture (we are solid there), good SRE practices, and a long tail of event you live through, fix, and make sure they never happen again. The bigger the fleet the faster the learning.