You seem to be ignoring the success of highly scalable managed NoSQL databases that has been all the rage when building high TPS services. What is your opinion on those?
I think a lot of the attraction of NoSQL databases is that they are seductive for people who don't know about the problems inherent in working with shared, persistent, long-lived data, (i.e. years). A NoSQL system lets such people get started easily. They start down the path, and then they run into dragons, and muggers, and hostile aliens. This is a really good description of what I mean: http://www.sarahmei.com/blog/2013/11/11/why-you-should-never....
disclaimer: work there
All that said, the world of successful solutions is not mutually exclusive or limited to only one winner.
Have a lot of data you need stored where there is limited relation between them directly, and attempting to be transactionally consistent across the boundaries there and the rest of the system is going to very expensive? Then doing some part of the data in a nosql db and the rest in a ACID compliant database is probably a good idea.
Similarly, putting 50GB vm images into a nosql db is probably pretty silly when it should probably be on a proper filesystem, or at most copied out and written back periodically.
And putting a bunch of data that is tightly coupled together and needs to be transactionally updated to ensure your dataset doesn’t turn to gibberish in a NoSQL backend is going to be a nightmare.