🤓 Single-table design has become the default recommendation for DynamoDB. Rick Houlihan's re:Invent talks turned it into gospel — teams now force everything into one table because "that's how you're supposed to do it." But after working with DynamoDB implementations for several years, I've seen this pattern cause problems when applied blindly — operational costs often outweigh theoretical benefits.
Love how this challanges the single-table orthodoxy. The operational cost examples really hit home, especialy the backup scenario where you're forced into hourly backups for everything or lose granularity. I've seen teams go multi-table after hitting similar issues and it makes monitoring so much cleaner when throttles happen.
Love how this challanges the single-table orthodoxy. The operational cost examples really hit home, especialy the backup scenario where you're forced into hourly backups for everything or lose granularity. I've seen teams go multi-table after hitting similar issues and it makes monitoring so much cleaner when throttles happen.