I feel for this person, but there's a line in here I found revealing:

> Unfortunately, Dgraph was always undervalued by investors.

This feels a bit like blaming the investors for why the company failed. To put it bluntly, there's a point at which you raise capital and build on vision. Your early investors and users are taking a giant leap that a. you can execute on the vision and b. customers will one day want to pay you for that vision.

Then there's point at which the rubber hits the road, and either customers pay you money for the thing you built or they don't. If they don't, you need a really convincing story to convince your investors they shouldn't cut their losses. It's a shame the company failed, it seems like they were working on some cool technology. But based on this post it sounds like no one wanted to pay for whatever it was they built.