Amazon DynamoDB vs Firestore

AWS's NoSQL workhorse: scales like a dream, but you'll pay for every query and pray you never need a JOIN meets google's real-time database that makes syncing feel like magic, until you hit the query limits. Here's our take.

Amazon DynamoDB

Nice Pick

AWS's NoSQL workhorse: scales like a dream, but you'll pay for every query and pray you never need a JOIN.

Pros

• Fully managed with automatic scaling and multi-AZ replication
• Single-digit millisecond latency for key-value operations
• Built-in security, backup, and in-memory caching with DynamoDB Accelerator (DAX)

Cons

• Pricing model can get expensive with high throughput or large datasets
• Limited query flexibility compared to relational databases (no JOINs, complex queries)

Firestore

Google's real-time database that makes syncing feel like magic, until you hit the query limits.

Pros

• Real-time data synchronization out of the box
• Offline support for mobile and web apps
• Automatic scaling with minimal operational overhead
• Seamless integration with Firebase and Google Cloud services

Cons

• Query limitations can be restrictive for complex data structures
• Costs can escalate quickly with high read/write volumes

The Verdict

Use Amazon DynamoDB if: You want fully managed with automatic scaling and multi-az replication and can live with pricing model can get expensive with high throughput or large datasets.

Use Firestore if: You prioritize real-time data synchronization out of the box over what Amazon DynamoDB offers.

The Bottom Line

Amazon DynamoDB wins

AWS's NoSQL workhorse: scales like a dream, but you'll pay for every query and pray you never need a JOIN.