3 ms·
I don't think they rely on Dynamo, they rely on an internal metadata service that Dynamo just happened to overwhelm with too many large requests.
by Jgrubb 11y ago
I don't think they rely on Dynamo, they rely on an internal metadata service that Dynamo just happened to overwhelm with too many large requests.
- beambot 11y agoFrom the 2nd sentence: > ... subsequent impact to other AWS services that depend on DynamoDB ... And the metadata service is part of DynamoDB: > The membership of a set of table/partitions within a server is managed by DynamoDB’s internal metadata service.
- ckozlowski 11y agoI just asked the question in a separate post before seeing yours, but I questioned this as well. Would it have been better to have a separate instance of DynamoDB independent from the one customers are writing to? I understand this is added cost/overhead, but it would have resulted in isolating the failure to the customer side only, I'd think.
- threeseed 11y ago"Amazon SQS uses an internal table stored in DynamoDB to store information describing its queues" "EC2 Auto Scaling stores information about its groups and launch configurations in an internal table in DynamoDB" "CloudWatch uses an internal table stored in DynamoDB" "Customers attempting to log into the Console during this period saw much higher latency in the login process. This was due to a very long timeout being set on an API call that relied on DynamoDB" Seems like poor architectural design to have all of these storing state in the same instances of DynamoDB that are used by customers. If a new feature like GSI is added it should under no circumstances ever impact other services.