Hacker News Reader

Comment by PeterCorless | Hacker News Reader

> "...or that requires 5000 nodes?"

While there are indeed deployments that large, I've yet to see a 5,000 node _benchmark_. Though if you've seen tests that big, please send me the link!

View on HN

That comment was specifically in regards to the claim that ScyllaDB is cheaper for nearly every use case. The 5000 nodes point was to make clear that you cannot disregard automation and maintenance costs. This is relevant to the post's claim about trying to be fair: the operation costs are included in the DynamoDB pricing and not in the ScyllaDB pricing and it was not even mentioned.

Though Amazon's managed service isn't completely managed at that scale either. There are still hot key partitions. There are still other issues that cause people to abandon DynamoDB at scale. And people still have "the blindfold on." q.v.,

https://read.acloud.guru/why-amazon-dynamodb-isnt-for-everyo...

This article is already pretty outdated. According to Jim Scharf with DynamoDB On-Demand you don't really have to care anymore about DynamoDB's implementation details, like partitioning: https://twitter.com/jim_scharf/status/1069056907686465537

There are tons of limitation on the on-demand, certainly it cannot go to extent of 120k ops. Check their example, they toy with a tiny workload.

As far as I know there is no upper limit of requests for DynamoDB. There is a default limit of 40.000 requests per second for provisioned capacity as well as for on-demand capacity, but you can get that increased upon request. See https://docs.aws.amazon.com/amazondynamodb/latest/developerg...

You might also want to read about the scaling behavior of DynamoDB On-Demand (https://docs.aws.amazon.com/amazondynamodb/latest/developerg...). Of course you can't immediately scale to any arbitrary request rate, but the way it's implemented sounds fine to me.

So do you have a source for your claim?

My claim is only an assumption. However, after our experience with not reaching the reserve limit plus the example they provided that didn't scale to a million of iops lead my to this guesstimate. We on the other hand have plenty of examples how to reach a million iops per server with a simple data model. But ignore me, just give Scylla a try! Our support is awesome too

It's not reasonable as a competing/cooperating vendor to claim that there are "tons of limitations" on DynamoDB on demand, and then in the next sentence disclaim it saying your previous assertion was "only an assumption."

Good to know!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com