Amazon DynamoDB Reviews

It is a NoSQL product. We can write what we want, and it will be stored. We need not worry about the structure. If we want to use a database for small use cases, we can use DynamoDB. If the CPU is high in a day, I can check what time it went high, how many people came into the site, and understand the database usage. Whenever the CPU is high, I send all the data to my database and analyze why it is high so that I can minimize the usage accordingly.

If we want to add another field, we can do so easily. It won’t show any errors. There is no need to migrate. Data modeling is easy. Whatever language we use with the product, we must check how to connect and write it. We must use some DynamoDB functions. I use the product with Lambda.

The pricing for larger databases is higher.

I have been using the solution for one and a half years.

We did not have any issues with the tool’s stability. We did not face any issues with bugs.

The tool’s scalability is good. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten.

The initial setup is straightforward.

We mostly use PostgreSQL.

I have used Amazon RDS. We do not use DynamoDB much. I will recommend the product to others. If we want a small database, Amazon DynamoDB is a good choice. We can use it for larger use cases, too. However, pricing might be high if we opt for the larger database. Overall, I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

I am currently using it for proof of concept and testing out its capabilities. We are publishing the IoT data on DynamoDB. We have its latest version.

Its scalability is really good. I can go up to a petabyte of data. It is more of an on-demand use case. I can go from 100 MB to 1 PB if I want, which is very good. Most of the other databases would want you to stick to a specific data allocation. 

Its subscription cost is lower than similar databases offered by other vendors.

Currently, there is no option for a scheduled refresh in this solution. We want the data to be populated into DynamoDB on a timely basis. Currently, you have to go to the DynamoDB table and hit the refresh button to populate it with the new data. If you have connected DynamoDB to a BI application for creating visualizations with charts, graphs, or other things, you would want it to get updated as per the schedule so that you have updated visualizations in your BI application.

We have been using AWS for close to one and a half years, and we have been using DynamoDB for 45 to 60 days.

It is stable. It is meeting our requirements. In fact, it is way better than what I expected. It is doing more than what I need.

Its scalability is really good. I can go as low as 100 MB and as high as 1 PB.

I didn't run into any issues, so I didn't need any support. The forums and documentation that Amazon provides are pretty much self-explanatory.

We were using another service called Amazon RDS for our data requirements. RDS is not as quick as DynamoDB, but it is not meant to be as quick as DynamoDB. RDS has its own use case, so they are not comparable. They have different use cases. We are switching to DynamoDB because our use case changed.

It is pretty straightforward. It is as simple as it can be. You do need to know what sort of data you have, which is a minimum requirement. After you get that in, everything is very much simple. You don't even need to go through a tutorial. It is that fast.

It is being done in-house, but as our client base grows, we might end up switching to a consultant.

Its subscription cost is lower than similar databases offered by other vendors.

I would recommend this solution based on the use case. It is pretty straightforward, and we haven't had any major issues. It is just plug-and-play. There is nothing else that you need to do.

I would rate Amazon DynamoDB an eight out of ten.

We have various use cases for the solution, including using it for IoT, messaging, etc.

The possibility of managing documents is the most valuable aspect of the solution. I like the fact that I don't have to define the fields. 

Features like the user interface and the pricing of the solution are also good.

Querying data on the solution is quite limited, but this is like any other NoSQL database. It's the most common criticism of the NoSQL database in general.

The solution is absolutely stable.

The solution is scalable.

The initial setup was straightforward. The deployment over DynamoDB services is a few seconds.

I implemented the solution myself.

We are using the public cloud deployment model.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten. I'm quite satisfied with the solution. Querying could always be better, but it's a typical complaint.

The design approach of DynamoDB makes it very fast and scalable.

We have used most of the features offered by DynamoDB because the product is mature and they fit very well.

They are planning to introduce versioning in the future (http://docs.aws.amazon.com/amazondynamodb/latest/developerguide/DynamoDBMapper.OptimisticLocking.html).

The application runs much faster and the query response time is three to five times faster when compared to Google Datastore.

The admin console is also very user friendly and provides hands-on features for the development team.

It provides good support for local development.

• The documentation could be refined to explain some basic topics better.
• The local DynamoDB version doesn't come with a tool to view the items inside the tables, so a third-party licensed product is required.
• An API to make the creation of complex queries with filters, limits, and offsets much easier is something to consider for future releases.
• Some things must be implemented manually and that takes a lot of time. At the same time, they are offered within the API in other NoSQL solutions.
• There is room for improvement of how the indexes are handled.
• An automated tool for increasing and decreasing the read/write capacity based on alarms would be welcomed.

We have been using the product for around six months.

There have been no stability issues. It works very well so far.

The design is based on key-value and offers great scalability and speed.

We have been using paid technical support during the development phase. I would give technical support a rating of 9/10.

They respond very fast and give good solutions, but sometimes they realize that it is a bug in the product and can't tell you when it will be fixed.

We used Google Datastore, but we switched to DynamoDB because we migrated to AWS.

The initial setup was straightforward.

Pricing is more complex than buying a license, so it depends on the products' needs.

We evaluated Microsoft Azure as a cloud solution, but in the end, we decided to go with AWS.

If you want a very fast NoSQL database, and you are willing to do some extra work in order to implement complex queries, DynamoDB is the way to go.

We host the cloud version of our software, ENSUR by DocXellent, on EC2 instances with fifteen separate installations currently.

These low-cost, flexible, and scalable VMs are an excellent value for the service they provide.

We also utilize CloudWatch monitoring, the Simple Notification Service, and the VPC solution for VPN connections for us, and for our clients, to these instances.

Previously, our product was exclusively sold as an on-premises solution. Once we decided on AWS for a cloud hosting platform, we were able to increase our sales dramatically. Within less than two years of offering this option, cloud hosted sales now make up more than 50% of our new business.

AWS is forward thinking and always adding new features. I generally cannot think of an area of improvement.

To be honest, AWS and their people know way more about the hosting and infrastructure needs of software developers than me and my team. I can’t think of any features that that could additionally add.

If I were to pick on one area to improve and an area in which they are not equal to or superior to the competition, I would say the user interface. It is far more simplistic that Azure’s slick presentation.

Of course, that is by choice, like the Amazon experience. But there are instances where the next step is not as logically presented as in Azure.

I still maintain that AWS is the unquestioned market leader in regards to features offered and is always introducing new ones in response to what their customers ask for.

They also are leaders in price, ease of use, and support, making them the obvious choice for my company’s cloud IaaS provider.

I have used Amazon AWS for three years.

There have been a couple of well-publicized instances of non-availability, but I think overall downtime of a few hours per year is acceptable.

The biggest problem is that everybody knows about downtime because of how public AWS’s failures are with their high-profile customers, who make news with their downtime.

We have had no problems with scalability.

I would give technical support a rating of 10/10. AWS stands for AWesome Support! They know way more about problems than I do and often patiently teach me while solving an issue.

We occasionally use Azure, alongside AWS, because we have a monthly credit from Microsoft. But AWS was first and all our commercial accounts are on AWS.

I was able to setup a prototype of our application by myself in half an hour. Since then, whenever I need to do something new, rather than read a whitepaper, I just call support and they walk me through it. This is part of the support they happily provide AND without griping about me not trying it by myself first.

You don’t need to look anywhere else. AWS is the leader in price and features, so why mess with success.

We evaluated Azure, Google, Rackspace and several smaller, now extinct companies.

The ease of operation. It's so easy to scale it up and down. And it delivers predictable performance, as promised. 

We are using DynamoDB in two projects now. One for storing large amounts of file metadata, and one for storing small amounts of session data. The fact that it is so easy to create tables and provision for known throughput saved us a lot of time, especially because we are deploying multiple environments and multiple regions. 

DynamoDB doesn't provide server-side encryption, so we had to do it manually.

Any replication to other regions requires writing code. It's not so bad, but would be better to get a solution out of the box. 

We store some protected patient information in DynamoDB, and in order to keep it HIPAA-compliant, we have to encrypt it at rest. Some services such as S3, Redshift and SQS will do the encryption on the server side, but with DynamoDB, the client application had to do the encryption before writing to the DB, and has to decrypt when reading. This means that we need to manage encryption keys: we need to store then securely and rotate them periodically, which is extra coding and complexity.

As for cross-region replication, AWS offers a way to do this using DynamoDB streams and Lambda, whereas other databases such as postgresql enable to configure replication without coding.

I have used it for one year.

We have not encountered any deployment issues. It's straightforward. 

We have not encountered any stability issues, but you should expect to get exceptions when you exceed the provisioned throughput. This is okay and it is by design. You need to handle it by retries with exponential backoff. 

We have not encountered any scalability issues.

We used PostgreSQL. We switched to DynamoDB for the scalability and ease of deployment and operation. 

Initial setup was straightforward.

An in-house team implemented it.

No time wasted on provisioning databases.

Pricing depends on volume and provisioned throughput. When low, the price is extremely low. But for really large amounts of data, it can be expensive. Make sure you keep there only data you really need available fast.

We evaluated Cassandra but chose to abandon it because it was harder to configure correctly and scale. 

The solution makes it simple to manage the database.

The most valuable features of the solution are its price and stability. The solution can handle all our payloads and workloads. The solution's documentation is very clear. Amazon DynamoDB is a good solution that is easy to configure. Data security is one of the main reasons we use the solution.

The solution's initial setup is a bit complex if you want it for something more specific.

Amazon DynamoDB is a stable solution, and I haven't faced any issues with stability.

More than 1,000 users are using the solution in our organization.

I've used MongoDB. I like both Amazon DynamoDB and MongoDB because they take different approaches. However, if I have to recommend one over the other, I will recommend Amazon DynamoDB.

The solution's initial setup is a bit complex if you want it for something more specific. However, it can be straightforward if you need it for something basic.

The solution's pricing is good, and it's not expensive.

The solution has helped us save 30% of our costs. Our main project is automation to help businesses communicate with their clients.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use the solution to emulate MongoDB for the document database.

The solution is useful for storing JSON documents. DynamoDB is a platform as a service. We don't have to administer the tool. We did not face any challenges while integrating the product with other services.

We use the document database. The primary key is quite slow. The free tier is quite hard to use.

I have worked with the tool for three years.

The tool is stable.

We are satisfied with the scalability of the tool.

The deployment is quite easy. The deployment takes a minute. We need only one engineer to install the solution.

The ROI is very good at the beginning. However, it gets expensive if we use it a lot.

I rate the pricing a six out of ten.

DynamoDB and Cosmos DB are more or less the same. My preference depends on the cloud I am working on. However, I prefer Cosmos DB because I have used it more.

Overall, I rate the product a seven out of ten.