> There are some in between solutions like eventual read consistency that are relying on traffic at some point easing enough so that the conductor can actually synchronize servers.
You can use CRDT's to give a formally correct semantics to these "inconsistent" scenarios. And they might well be something that's best explored in a not-purely-relational model, since the way they work is pretty unique and hard to square with ordinary relational db's.
CRDT is just a fancy term for the strategy that still has to eventually merge data. In case of CRDT the data organized / designed in a way that makes it easier. The keyword here is "merging" which by definition kills "infinite" scalability.
You can dance around all you want but you just can't beat laws of nature.
Sure you can always design something that works for your particular case but generic solution is not possible.
Can't you arrange merging into ie. binary tree - in that setup you'd be collapsing merges into single one at the root and cummulative throughput at leaf nodes could be exponentially higher?
You can use CRDT's to give a formally correct semantics to these "inconsistent" scenarios. And they might well be something that's best explored in a not-purely-relational model, since the way they work is pretty unique and hard to square with ordinary relational db's.