What operational overhead does Catalyst add for state management compared to Restate's zero-config approach?

Catalyst requires you to provision and manage a Dapr state store component (e.g., Redis, SQL Server), including connection strings, scaling, backups, and monitoring. Restate's virtual objects eliminate this by embedding state within the runtime, reducing operational overhead. However, Catalyst's approach gives you control over state store selection, retention policies, and compliance requirements. If you prefer minimal ops and state that 'just works' out of the box, Restate is simpler. Catalyst is better when you need to enforce specific state store SLAs or audit controls.