Tens of thousands of transactions may be performed per second, each taking about 1 to 4 seconds to be applied (sufficing for any use cases that are not necessarily near-real time).
The database supports procedural functions written in all kinds of hipster/systems-oriented programming languages, and may be bootstrapped to support all kinds of data structures and queries.
It was made to be developer-friendly as possible.
The database can run on minimal hardware, from as little as 512MB of RAM and 2vCPUs to more along the lines of 2GB RAM and 4vCPUs. The database may be hosted for a minimal cost.
The database is resilient in spite of all but one of your nodes crashing, allowing you to fulfill Tier 4 SLA agreements in terms of uptime without the need of a team of Site Reliability Engineers (SRE), or engineers with domain expertise in distributed systems.
My question to you in managerial or in development positions at small/large startups or enterprises in HN: how much would you pay for such a database?
How would the price differ if it was through a one-time/monthly licensing fee? What fee structure would you personally prefer?
If instead this database was bootstrapped around with a developer productivity framework like Meteor that would significantly speed up time-to-production, where you can build an entire platform - from backend to frontend - in a single codebase, would you pay more?
1). Either "open source code solution" - allowing other members to fix, enhance, optimize the app.
2). OR, "one-time licensing fees with open source code allowing a change in code for own use case -AGPL"
3). "if monthly then - expecting constant updates and innovation on the product on a regular basis" to justify the subscription fees [still self-hosted and not on other parties cloud].
Well, once I hear that, I wouldn't be willing to pay anything. I admit, you did say magic consensus protocol. But by definition, this is impossible, unless you can reliably detect a node has gone down and isn't up and serving requests somehow. TBF that is to some extent possible. But a network partition will still take it down.
At a certain point, the biggest reliability factor is the complexity of the software, not the reliability of the hardware. You want the clustering logic as simple as possible. You need parts of query evaluation, hipster programming language evaluation, to be precisely deterministic.
Whatever you have built, clearly doesn't do all of these things today, if ever. What have you built or what are you building? How is it different, today, from whatever else is in the market.
I have a sushi restaurant. But, instead of us making sushi for you, we show you and your guests how to make it and by the end of the night, you're doing it like a pro and having a great experience, with wonderful food.
Then, we'll let you know if it's worth giving it a shot.
That is just too slow for anything that I would need. I'd be impressed with hundreds of thousands of transactions per second with double digit millisecond latencies.
But look at the closest competitors and see what they charge perhaps?
For example, take a look at Cockroach Labs, or MySQL InnoDB Cluster, or one of the many database as a service providers, or whatever you think is the closest competitor, and see what their licensing terms and pricing are...