Which says &quot; At design time we had concerns about Kafka’s I&#x2F;O model and its lack of strong durability guarantees‐a non-starter for an application like a distributed transaction log[3]&quot;<p>Seems reasonable, right?<p>Except &quot;[3] Kafka addressed these durability concerns in version 0.8&quot;<p>So they built a whole thing, because they didn&#x27;t bother to ask or say &quot;hey, if we help fix the durability, would that we welcome?&quot; or even &quot;do you guys have a plan and timeline to fix it?&quot;<p>That&#x27;s .... not great.<p>Now, maybe there are other reasons, but they aren&#x27;t elucidated in this blog post :P.<p>Even then, my general view would be &quot;did you approach the community and discuss your concerns or just dismiss them out of hand as infeasible&quot;, mainly because my experience is that if you do this, you often find they have exactly the same set of concerns&#x2F;goals, and just need more resources to make it happen.<p>The desire to build shiny objects is very large.  Outside of the paper plans of engineering teams, these things rarely end up up more shiny than what already exists or will be built by the time you are done.