Not sure if it's true that LSM trees are so dominant, it was a bit of a fad a few years ago during the NoSQL hype. They can be a good default for concurrent write-heavy workloads like analytics or logging, but they can be tricky to tune.
The good-ol' copy-on-write memmapped B-Tree is still widely used, even on newer key-value stores like redb (I am more familiar with the Rust ecosystem), and it claims to outperform rocksdb (the go-to LSM-tree kvs) on most metrics other than batch writes [1] (although probably biased).
LMDB is still widely used (one of the main classic B-tree kvs), and Postgres, SQLite and MongoDB (WiredTiger), among others, are still backed by B-Tree key-value stores. The key-value storage backends tend to be relatively easy to swap, and I don't know of major efforts to migrate popular databases to a LSM tree backend.
Fair point. We can all do with less meetings. I think tools like chat platforms / loom are all aimed at reducing the number of meetings we need to do.
Though, you do have to abide by Metcalfe's law. Most modern work happens in teams and therefore, you have to pay the price of O(N^2) communication, where N = size of the team.
I don't see communication decreasing overall. We just have to use the right tools to be more effective at it.
Could be a feature request to integrate with Matrix APIs. For example, we're doing bidirectional sync with Slack already. And unidirectional sync with Discord.
