No temporary tables, no foreign keys, no views, no more than 10k rows in a transaction.
Except for some basic wire compatibility with the postgres protocol, I'd hardly call this a "database", and more a key-value store.
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/aurora-dsql/latest/userguide/wor...
I do not want to denormalize my data model, i do not have a high performance usecase, I simply want infrastructure that scales with usage (down to 0) and a flexible normalized model I can build more on top of easily.
DDB is great and all until you're asked to add 3 filters and orderby feature and suddenly you're adding elastic search to your project
Not that it matters but it's D1 but I noticed people sometimes call it D2, maybe by analogy with R2.
This is the first release of something new and groundbreaking.
Hopefully that keeps the pricing reasonable. :)
But seriously, for a smaller CRUD app, this could be sufficient, even "magical," if the price is right. For my part though, the lack of multiple databases per cluster puts multi-tenant systems completely off the table. Now that you mention it, I almost wonder if this is a giant hack on top of Valkey/Redis...
I don't think that will matter. This feels much more like DynamoDB where you're charged for GB used/stored and no infra cost, so no reason to nest databases
That makes it very easy to manage access to sensitive data.
Having it be Postgres compatible is the big selling point.
Who else would use it? Not sure, gaming perhaps?