[bazza451]

I’m not going to fault him on the RDBMS comment, they scale shockingly due to the aforementioned connections comment but dynamodb is really not a replacement for a traditional RDBMS.

But I’ve seen so many people get themselves into trouble by using dynamodb as a silver bullet and not thinking heavily about the design of their data. If you try and use RDBMS patterns (PK and FK relationships) there’s a whole heap of pain due to atomicity only being on one record in one table. Some times you can’t escape these patterns as well as it is the best fit for data or you require strong consistency of your model (e.g. financial).

They released dynamodb transactions (for Java only) but from what I’ve seen that just increases the complexity of solutions, you end up with more reads/writes per call and a heap of other stuff surrounding your data. Serverless story currently for stuff like this really has drawbacks