>From past experience, DynamoDB costs are driven primarily by desired request capacity (per table). If you're interested in a technical comparison between DynamoDB and Riak, see the comparisons section [0] on our docs site.
[0] http://docs.basho.com/riak/latest/references/appendices/comparisons/Riak-Compared-to-DynamoDB/ -- Hector On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 11:11 AM, Evan Vigil-McClanahan <[email protected]> wrote: > I can't speak to the costing issues, as that isn't something I am > terribly familiar with, but at the moment, riak still has some > overhead issues with very small values. There are upcoming > optimizations in the next major (1.4) release that should help. What > issues did you run into? > > On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 8:06 AM, David Koblas <[email protected]> wrote: >> Spent some time with the AWS folks the other day and was getting sold on >> using DynamoDB for some of our large Key Value store needs. However given >> the read/write economics of DynamoDB vs. Instance+Storage costs on Riak I >> was wondering if anybody has done a good thinking around where the cost >> inflections points are? >> >> Also before I go and benchmark things how does Riak perform with 2B entries >> which are < 1K in size, when I last did the benchmarks - just before 1.0 - >> there were a few issues. >> >> Thanks, >> David >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> riak-users mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com > > _______________________________________________ > riak-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com _______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
