They have had similar difficulties before.
As someone who jumped on the calckey/firefish bandwagon relatively early (like earlier this year) and as someone who wishes all the best for the platform and lead dev …
I have to warn anyone thinking of committing to it that it is still basically beta software and the main dev isn’t really interested in making that clear or even realising it. There’s a lot of hype and excitement around the platform (it is refreshingly cool, along with its base, misskey) that doesn’t accurately reflect the difficulties the platform will put you through as a user.
Last I checked, they were pretty much out of their depth on database engineering. As in the lead dev openly admitted to this with their personal account. So another database upgrade going bad without any reasonable estimates of down time completely tracks. It happened a few months ago and that’s why I no longer use firefish. The main problem being that the dev doesn’t actually know how long things will take and is clearly hacking things together the best they can.
Which is all fine, I hope things come together. But you’re not getting a stable platform with firefish or a lead dev that is completely on top of what they are doing. It might all come together soon! But I can’t help but suspect moving off of Postgres to another DB isn’t gonna fix their problems however much they think it will.
Going through firefish taught me that when it comes to offering software to users, your first job, before any features or aesthetics or design ideas, however awesome they might be, is to make sure it works well and reliably. Fail at that and you’ve failed as a developer.
At points this year, I’m afraid to say, firefish failed as a piece of software, which was simultaneously easy to understand as a FOSS indie Fedi project, but also sad to see as a FOSS indie Fedi project.