4 ms·
DynamoDB has specific requirements on how data is partitioned. You have to do upfront planning on how you access your data based on keys. Mongodb is more flexi
by dfischer 8y ago
DynamoDB has specific requirements on how data is partitioned. You have to do upfront planning on how you access your data based on keys.
Mongodb is more flexible in this regard.
I’m sure there’s other big differences but this is the biggest to my experience with both.
- anonytrary 8y agoI was asking about DocumentDB, not MongoDB, but maybe I missed something. From their site: > Amazon DocumentDB implements the Apache 2.0 open source MongoDB 3.6 API by emulating the responses that a MongoDB client expects from a MongoDB server, allowing you to use your existing MongoDB drivers and tools with Amazon DocumentDB So, is this a "managed MongoDB" or is it a NOSQL AmazonDB that just implements the same API as MongoDB? If the latter, I don't think we can assume this is the same thing as MongoDB, because the internals might be completely different.
- Slippery_John 8y agoI would imagine this doesn't use any MongoDB code, or else the SSPL license would brutalize them. That said, I would be surprised if the experience is much worse.
- k__ 8y agoSounds like the latter to me, they probably implemented it on top of one of their other DBs.
- anonytrary 8y agoLmao I was a bit afraid this might be some surface-level API wrapper around DynamoDB, in which case this is less cool than I thought. It doesn't seem to be the case at a first glance but I wish it was a bit more clear on the site exactly how this relates to DynamoDB, if at all. Maybe I'll just have to read more about it. Hopefully the internal architecture gets away from DynamoDB-style partitioning.
- dfischer 8y agoI get what you're saying now. I assumed it was a managed mongoDB – I should have paid more attention. Thanks!