We are wrestling with questions like this on the new document database we’re building. A database should correspond to some administrative domain object.

Today in Fireproof a database is a unit of sharing, but we are working toward a broader model where a database corresponds to an individual application’s state. So one database is all the shared documents not just a single unit of sharing.

These small changes early on can have big impact later. If you’re interested in these sort of design questions, the Fireproof Discord is where we are hashing out the v0.20 api.

(I was an early contributor to Apache CouchDB. Damien Katz, creator of CouchDB, is helping with engineering and raised these questions recently, along with other team members.)

> Durable Objects map well to use cases where there actually are documents

Right. I wouldn’t dispute this. This is akin to a file format from software back in the day (like say photoshop but now with multiplayer). What this means is that you get different compatibility boundaries and you relinquish centralized control and ability to do transparent migrations and analysis. For all intents and purposes, the documents should be more or less opaque and self-contained. I personally like this, but I also recognize that most web engineers of our current generation are not used to think in this disciplined and defensive way upfront.