I think the lack of gems/libraries/patterns is proof of this. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Not saying there's no reason to ever do it, proceed with caution and know for a fact you need db per tenant.
> I think lack of gems/libraries/patterns is proof of this
This would effectively disqualify any new pattern from emerging. There have been many new patterns that have challenged the consensus that ended up becoming dominant.
Running some `DELETE FROM x WHERE TenantId = 1` is not a huge deal.
And yes I see your point about new patterns, but were talking about multi-tenancy not some new AI thing.
Ss someone with decades of experience I have found that if I go to implement [insert common pattern] and there is 0 libraries one way and 20 libraries the other way I need to check myself and determine if I am swimming against the current for little upside.