Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is that the same as Willard's Y-fast tree? If so, then no they're not very similar. If not then I'm unfamiliar and I should read that paper.
Nope, not the same. From the descriptions you give above it is very similar (a modified B-tree with heaps of delayed insertions in internal nodes), though the analysis in the paper does not use CO techniques. This tweak to B-trees to support fast insertions works so well I am really surprised it has not become more common in practice. The only downside I can think of is that flushes down the tree when internal buffer…
When you actually go and implement the system, you find all these behaviors that really aren't expressed in the theory. There are lots of things we're still experimenting with. Flushing isn't too hard, if a flush makes another node way too big, you can just flush that one too. We don't allow our cascading flushes to fan out, to prevent latency-style problems, but they can flush all the way down to a leaf. There are some other fun problems around query strategies and concurrency control too. It's definitely a fun structure to play with.