[PERSPECTIVE P01: Hybrid architecture doubles the on-call blast radius]
Every additional stateful dependency in the critical path is a pager event waiting to happen. A hybrid PostgreSQL+DynamoDB architecture means two connection pools to monitor, two backup strategies to validate, two failover runbooks to maintain, and a consistency boundary between them that will produce subtle data drift under partial failure. RFC 0058's single-table DynamoDB design has exactly one failure domain per region -- adding a relational database does not halve complexity, it squares the state space of outage scenarios. From an operational standpoint, the only justification for a second database is if DynamoDB provably cannot serve a hot-path query, and nothing in RFC 0051's current access patterns reaches that threshold.

[PERSPECTIVE P02: Docker-required local parity is a cheaper operational bet than dual-database parity]
Keeping DynamoDB Local in Docker in sync with production DynamoDB is a version-pinning problem with a known blast radius. Keeping a local PostgreSQL AND a local DynamoDB both in sync with their respective production counterparts, while also maintaining cross-database consistency guarantees, is an integration-testing problem with a combinatorial blast radius. RFC 0053's abstraction layer tempts you into believing the trait boundary hides the operational difference, but traits do not page you at 3 AM when a cross-database transaction partially commits.

[TENSION T01: Operational simplicity vs. analytical query flexibility]
The strongest argument for a relational layer is ad-hoc cross-dialogue analytics, but introducing it as a production dependency for a query pattern that does not yet exist violates the principle of deferring complexity until it is load-bearing.

---