In many ways, I think the author is echoing the same frustrations as with Google App Engine's Datastore ( http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3431132 App Engine charges $6,500 to update a ListProperty on 14.1 million entities ). Both Google Datastore and the new AWS DynamoDB are great, fast services, but they are a bit too expensive at the medium/high end.
Frankly, I wish App Engine/AWS/Heroku/etc would introduce a database that traded speed for cheaper costs. I'd be fine with certain writes being delayed if it meant lower costs.
If Amazon had an option to use HDD instead of SSD storage for a certain DynamoDB table and adjusted the pricing accordingly, would that pretty much take care of users wanting basically what DyanamoDB offers except for cheaper with slightly worse performance?
In many ways, I think the author is echoing the same frustrations as with Google App Engine's Datastore ( http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3431132 App Engine charges $6,500 to update a ListProperty on 14.1 million entities ). Both Google Datastore and the new AWS DynamoDB are great, fast services, but they are a bit too expensive at the medium/high end.
Frankly, I wish App Engine/AWS/Heroku/etc would introduce a database that traded speed for cheaper costs. I'd be fine with certain writes being delayed if it meant lower costs.