I’m not sure the risk of an immature engine is worth it to them. Customers pay for hosted Postgres because they want to not worry about doing it themselves for cheaper. They are paying for reliability.
I think you’re correct about the existence of an economic incentive for the cloud providers, but I anticipate it would be offered as a distinct product to “vanilla” (at least in the sort term).
Things get interesting though because this space of database products has trended towards restricting who can host in their license terms (TimeScale, ClickHouse, etc). If that’s Orioles cash-in play then maybe cloud providers can’t use it anyway.
I suspect the fate of the engine will be determined by its funding source
But Aurora RDS is a separate product - it's not sold as standard Postgres which you can also get. It's not like they are trying to pass off aurora as the same thing.
Sorry for the very late reply, but Aurora PostgreSQL isn't just wire protocol compatible like CockRoachDB. It actually is PostgreSQL modified for their service. It includes all your favorite PG extensions and even large object functionality.
I think you’re correct about the existence of an economic incentive for the cloud providers, but I anticipate it would be offered as a distinct product to “vanilla” (at least in the sort term).
Things get interesting though because this space of database products has trended towards restricting who can host in their license terms (TimeScale, ClickHouse, etc). If that’s Orioles cash-in play then maybe cloud providers can’t use it anyway.
I suspect the fate of the engine will be determined by its funding source