Nigel.BasherQ: Thank you for your reply to my review.
Thanks for the transparent reply — I'd rather back a founder who plans for sustainability than one who over-promises.
I'm not asking for unlimited anything, just a fairer line and a real growth path. What I'd consider fair:
1. 500K records per database at the top tier instead of 250K — double the headroom, still a clear sustainable ceiling.
2. The one-time records upgrade raised to a 1M limit — a genuine growth path at a one-time fee that still earns you revenue.
That combination fully resolves my concern: fairer baseline, real runway, sustainable for you. I plan to build here for years — I just need to know the ceiling isn't a wall.
Riya_NoCodeBackend
Sep 19, 2026A: Thanks — this is a much more constructive way to look at it, and I appreciate that you're thinking about sustainability as well.
I agree that customers who build something successful with NoCodeBackend should have a sensible path to grow. The exact numbers and pricing, however, need to be evaluated against the actual storage, backup, infrastructure, and operational costs at scale. We don't want to simply pick a larger number today and discover later that the economics don't work.
We'll definitely take your suggestions around a higher top-tier allowance and larger one-time upgrade options into consideration as we review the scaling model.
Our goal is exactly what you described: substantial headroom in the included capacity, with a practical path forward for customers who genuinely outgrow it.