I haven't had the chance to test out CDC yet so my comments do not in any way address reliability, particularly as Kate points out, with MS's past track record. However a number of posters question performance and benefit over traditional methods (eg triggers). A key point about CDC is that SQLServer uses the transaction log to work out the changes. This means that the auditing is done in the background by the server after the user transaction has committed. This is a fundamental point. The trigger method requires that auditing is done as part of the user transaction and so increases the overall time for the transaction to completed, including any potential contention with other transactions. CDC makes it a background task which obviously still uses resources in terms of cpu and cache, but it does not delay the transaction or impact the user experience, assuming you're server has adequate resources to handle the workload of the application, which it would need regardless of CDC or triggers.

Cheers

Roddy