3 ms·

I use it, it's expensive and slow and hard to develop for, but it never goes down or causes operational headaches You must pair it with an in memory cache, eve

I use it, it's expensive and slow and hard to develop for, but it never goes down or causes operational headaches You must pair it with an in memory cache, even then it's still slow and expensive I'd still recommend it though for some use cases

petervandijck 16y ago
So it's slow and needs memcached or something? That's dissapointing. What usecases would you use it for? Never going down just doesn't seem that big of a deal for me, their aws mysql service also "never" goes down, so I might as well use that and gain all the sql advantages, right?
- alexbosworth 16y ago
  Never going down in a database doesn't just mean that it doesn't have downtime, it also means that as a whole system it's immune to bad queries. Bad queries can destroy you in MySQL, if you are doing dynamically created queries that hit un-optimized areas, it can bring down all the other queries too. I'd typically use Memcache with MySQL too, so there isn't any real difference in that case. One use case I like SimpleDb for is for small scripts that need a very simple data store.
- jrockway 16y ago
  It depends on what you think "slow" means. It's the same speed when you're running one concurrent query as it is when you're running a hundred million concurrent queries. That's what we call "scaling".
lsb 16y ago
Never goes down or causes operational headaches is something I've found SQLite excels at, plus you get all the benefit from a query-optimizing relational database, plus a hot backup is just cp the database file.
szilveszter 16y ago
We use SimpleDB from outside of AWS datacenters (Rackspace), and it does go down every now and then. Usually once a week for a couple of minutes we get timeouts and connection resets. For us it was a good choice because we were on tight schedule, and didn't have to spend time on operation. In the longer term however, we'll migrate back to an in-house solution.

petervandijck 16y ago

So it's slow and needs memcached or something? That's dissapointing. What usecases would you use it for? Never going down just doesn't seem that big of a deal for me, their aws mysql service also "never" goes down, so I might as well use that and gain all the sql advantages, right?

alexbosworth 16y ago
Never going down in a database doesn't just mean that it doesn't have downtime, it also means that as a whole system it's immune to bad queries. Bad queries can destroy you in MySQL, if you are doing dynamically created queries that hit un-optimized areas, it can bring down all the other queries too. I'd typically use Memcache with MySQL too, so there isn't any real difference in that case. One use case I like SimpleDb for is for small scripts that need a very simple data store.
jrockway 16y ago
It depends on what you think "slow" means. It's the same speed when you're running one concurrent query as it is when you're running a hundred million concurrent queries. That's what we call "scaling".

lsb 16y ago

Never goes down or causes operational headaches is something I've found SQLite excels at, plus you get all the benefit from a query-optimizing relational database, plus a hot backup is just cp the database file.

szilveszter 16y ago

We use SimpleDB from outside of AWS datacenters (Rackspace), and it does go down every now and then. Usually once a week for a couple of minutes we get timeouts and connection resets. For us it was a good choice because we were on tight schedule, and didn't have to spend time on operation. In the longer term however, we'll migrate back to an in-house solution.