Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 8201673
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 7, 20262026-06-07T06:53:47+00:00 2026-06-07T06:53:47+00:00

I have a very simple database structure (basically only a user table) with two

  • 0

I have a very simple database structure (basically only a user table) with two basic operations:

Users can log in, get an authentication token, and later submit some data with that token that is stored in this User table (only a couple of bytes).

However, many users can do this simultaneously (100k users in one minute, for instance, for a restricted period of time).

I am wondering what would be a good choice of technology. I’m not afraid to use NoSQL databases or anything, and am trying to end up with something scalable.

I’ve been thinking about a queueing system, and a task that populates the database.. or would I just need Amazon SimpleDB and not even bother with queueing the messages? Or do I need the RDS solution to get multiple EC2 instances talking to the “same” database? Or not amazon web services at all?
Thanks for any pointers, I’m pretty new at this and want to get some insight in the various trade-offs and what’s best for my application.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-07T06:53:48+00:00Added an answer on June 7, 2026 at 6:53 am

    As PachinSV pointed out, you can choose whichever DB solution you prefer. I will add one more: you can launch an EC2 instance and install the DBMS of your choice, either NOSQL (MongoDB, Cassandra), SQL (MSSQL, MySQL, Oracle), or whatever. I will try, with this answer, to handle the other aspects of your question (the application itself, the scalability and, if needed, the storage).

    My suggestion, though, would be something like:

    -One or two EC2 instances, probably small or medium (take a look at the instance types here), in order to take care of your application load. More on EC2 here.
    -Whenever you need to scale, you can add an Elastic Load Balancer in front of the EC2 instances, so you can keep adding instances to your ecosystem while maintaining an horizontal scalability.
    -For the DB, I would start with a RDS instance (probably small size), with the system of your preference, either MySQL, SQL Server or Oracle. With RDS, you can change your instance size as you go, and you can also add one or more read-replicas in case your app becomes read-intensive in the future. More on RDS here. Another good option, as PachinSV pointed out, would be DynamoDB, for the reasons he mentioned already — partitioning, performance, less restrictions, etc.
    -Although you have not mentioned, if you need scalable storage, S3 is definitely the way to go, and would be ready for your use.

    Hope it helps.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I have a very simple database table that joins two other tables in a
I currently have a very simple MySQL database (articlesDB) with 1 table (articles) and
I have a very simple Rails app with a very simple relational database: Category
I have a very simple scenario involving a database and a JMS in an
I have a very simple table called Member , which consists of the following:
Somehow I can't read an XML file with very simple structure in my PowerShell
I am using Delphi 2009. I have a very simple data structure, with 2
I have a very simple ASP.NET MVC site which displays images from the database.
So I have a very simple structure: I have Orders that have a unique
I have a very simple database with 2 tables: Test and Tester, Test has

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.