My only suggestion would that — in my view — characterizing async replication as “good enough” probably isn’t doing it justice.

For extended distances, it’s the only practical option: sync replication just doesn’t work. And in high-update environments, it can offer better performance (not to mention lower line cost) than sync alternatives.

And, if you consider remote CDP as a form of async (many people do), one could argue that it offers superior functionality as compared to sync alternatives.

Again, looking forward to your comparo!