Great to see fresh ideas! One thing I don&#x27;t like in the presentation is that tapir is presented as doing better than what is out there without stating the conditions. First off there&#x27;s quite a bit of hand-waving when it comes to leadership bottlenecks -- please assume that sane sharding is occurring. I&#x27;m not entirely sure transactions spanning partitions is something unique to say paxos. The abort rate vs. contention seem off. looking at the paper all the nodes are in a single datacenter. I would love to see these numbers where tapir is spread across larger geographical regions. My suspicion is that at higher latency will negatively impact the abort rate more so than with a strong leader. What about poor clock synchronization conditions? What about testing with a variety of client latencies? Since the client is effectively acting as a leader in tapir, the client is, in some ways, contending with other clients and the abort rate may be correlated to client latency. I don&#x27;t think high-latency clients observe this same correlation than with a strong leader. I wish more of the compromises were presented.