We had a sales call with them last year and got to speak to one of their devs. The impression they gave was that it was mostly ex-Facebook data guys that left to start a company based on the work they did on Cassandra and a few other internal projects.
The really interesting feature, to us, was the promise that once the Postgres-compatible layer was complete, we could use whatever semantics were appropriate for our business use case while using the same logical database cluster. We could use the Redis interface for persistent caching, the CQL interface for our NoSQL-appropriate use cases and the Postgres interface for our more traditional use cases. And the client libraries for all those interfaces are the same ones we already use to talk to Redis and Postgres (our conversation happened because we were starting a project that was more NoSQL-appropriate, so we weren’t using Cassandra yet), so very little of our code would have to change.
They're a good team. The same data isn't available across different interfaces but there is definitely value in having a single core system that serves multiple apps and models.
The really interesting feature, to us, was the promise that once the Postgres-compatible layer was complete, we could use whatever semantics were appropriate for our business use case while using the same logical database cluster. We could use the Redis interface for persistent caching, the CQL interface for our NoSQL-appropriate use cases and the Postgres interface for our more traditional use cases. And the client libraries for all those interfaces are the same ones we already use to talk to Redis and Postgres (our conversation happened because we were starting a project that was more NoSQL-appropriate, so we weren’t using Cassandra yet), so very little of our code would have to change.