Take the 2-minute tour ×
Super User is a question and answer site for computer enthusiasts and power users. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I read through the DynamoDB pricing page and I'm a little confused about their free usage tier. Let's say a developer want's to get started on DynamoDB and he gets 100MB of free storage + 5 writes and 10 reads per second.

Since a table cannot be created below 5w/r5 capacity that would mean a developer trying DynamoDB can only create 2 tables at max.

That would also mean that if someone had to create several tables during development, they would have to pay about $7.50 (resp half if only 5w is used) a month for a table that sits there and more or less does nothing.

Is that correct?

share|improve this question
    
I think this is something that only the DynamoDB folks could actually answer. –  EBGreen Jan 25 '12 at 16:41

1 Answer 1

up vote 3 down vote accepted

Update

The smallest provisioned throughput one can request has meanwhile been reduced to 1w/1r capacity units, see Amazon DynamoDB - Reduced Minimum Throughput for details, which specifically addresses the problem at hand:

The AWS Free Usage Tier allows you to consume up to 100 MB of DynamoDB storage, 5 read capacity units, and 5 write capacity units per month. As a very beneficial side effect of today's announcement, you can now create up to 5 tables within the Free Usage Tier. [emphasis mine]


Original Answer

Since a table cannot be created below 5w/r5 capacity that would mean a developer trying DynamoDB can only create 2 tables at max.

You are correct, as more clearly outlined in the respective FAQ entry What is the minimum throughput I can provision for a single DynamoDB table?:

The smallest provisioned throughput you can request is 5 write capacity units and 5 read capacity units.

This falls within the free tier, which allows for 5 units of write capacity and 10 units of read capacity. The free tier applies to the account level, not the table level. A given account may create a single table with 5 units of write capacity and 10 units of read capacity.

The resulting one table limitation might be considered a rather significant restriction concerning the other AWS Free Usage Tier elements indeed, but on the other hand you can't handle serious real world scenarios with a single EC2 micro instance either (though technically there are two available as of recently).

The Amazon DynamoDB use cases are clearly targeting respectively advanced scenarios, thus a free tier is probably not considered a necessity outside of testing scenarios.

That would also mean that if someone had to create several tables during development, they would have to pay about $7.50 (resp half if only 5w is used) a month for a table that sits there and more or less does nothing.

That's correct as well - by satisfying the advanced customer need for provisioned throughput, Amazon introduces a new pricing model, as summarized in section Throughput Reservation within the elaborate technical and business analysis Amazon DynamoDB: First Look:

This type of atomic service level provisioning is both differentiating and compelling for certain customer types. Promising single digit latency at a selected throughput level with zero customer effort required is likely to be attractive for customers that require – or think they require – a particular service level. And by requiring customers to manually determine their required provisioning level, Amazon stands to benefit from customer overprovisioning; customers will feel pain if they’re under-provisioned and react, but conversely may fail to observe that they’re over. Much like mobile carriers, Amazon wins in both scenarios.

Again, this highlights the target market: customers with significant requirements and respectively guaranteed service level. Once you actually fall into that category, paying a small premium for an idling table eventually isn't going to be of any concern compared to the benefits of the service ;)

share|improve this answer
1  
Amazon has since changed the minimum, it's now 1r/1w for table. –  Alan Nov 24 '12 at 6:52
    
@Alan - thanks for pointing this out, I've updated the answer accordingly. –  Steffen Opel Nov 24 '12 at 13:26

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.