I see. Looking at the docs, the pricing for storing data is measured in Gigs (I think $1 per gig per month) - not Tb. This makes me think it is intended for smallish data.
I have a database now with 40 Tb - this would cost $40k a month just to store!
Yikes! I think this is really positioned for side projects and microservices. There is a clear path to migrating to a full instance or Postgres cluster over certain usage levels, but for many cases being able to scale to zero is still economically and operationally valuable.
40Tb is a ton-o-data! Snowflake sounds like a good fit.
