Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

Is local secondary indices and lower operational costs than Cassandra a good reason(s)?

Operational costs are in the eye of the beholder. We evaluated DynamoDB for a new use case but we're going with Cassandra because the storage costs alone more than made up for ops overhead. At least IMO, Cassandra's support for multicolumn range queries (via clustering columns) and the cheaper storage you can use obviate local secondary indices. (Cassandra has secondary indices as well but it seems like most folks prefer further denormalization--at least, that's what we're doing.)

Not without considering the throttling you will hit if you exceed provisioned IOPS. You really want to consider all the angles on dynamoDB before committing to it; limitations, unique benefits, interface, etc.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Apply to YC | Contact