Skip to content

Run

7 emulators 824 tests

Results as of this run. The arrow shows each target's movement since the previous run it was tested in. The suite grew this run, so an upward arrow can be the new tests biting rather than a target getting worse.

When this run was published the board led with a single correctness percentage. The figures here are that run's own results restated as divergence and coverage, so they read differently from what this page showed at the time. The changelog has the change.

Suite grew from 817 to 824 tests this run.

That's 7 new tests measured against every target. Movement below compares to the previous run, so a rise here is as likely to be the stricter suite as a real regression.

What changed in the suite this run

Suite on

Grew to 824 tests, up 7, in two parts: two sibling-parity gaps where one half of a rule was pinned and the other was not, and the capacity accounting of conditional and idempotent transactional writes. All characterised against real DynamoDB in eu-west-2.

The first covers the LSI side of the INCLUDE-projection-without-NonKeyAttributes rejection; the GSI side already had it. An LSI declared with ProjectionType INCLUDE and no NonKeyAttributes is rejected as a ValidationException in tier1 and pinned to the exact message in tier3, the same wording the GSI case returns.

The second pins the Query message for Select SPECIFIC_ATTRIBUTES with no ProjectionExpression, which Scan already had. Query and Scan enforce the same rule but word it differently: Query wraps the phrase in the "1 validation error detected:" envelope, Scan returns it bare.

The transaction cases settle what a conditional TransactWriteItems actually costs. A passing condition adds no read capacity: a conditional write bills the same 2 WCU per sub-1KB item as an unconditional one, and a standalone ConditionCheck costs 2 WCU, billed as write not read. Idempotent replay splits the accounting - the first call reports 2 write capacity units, a same-token replay within the window reports 2 read capacity units for re-reading the stored result. A failing condition cancels the transaction, and the response carries no ConsumedCapacity at all. Answers #27.

  1. DynamoDB
    live (AWS)

    Runs via: AWS service

    Grade baseline

    no divergence in all 33 regions · covers 100.0% of the suite

    ground truth
    Tier breakdown
    Tier 1 · Core 0.0% diverges
    100.0% covered
    Tier 2 · Complete 0.0% diverges
    100.0% covered
    Tier 3 · Strict 0.0% diverges
    100.0% covered
  2. Dynoxide
    0.11.1 14 unsupported ; covers 98.3% of the suite

    Runs via: npx, Docker, Homebrew, binary, npm, cargo, embedded, GitHub Action, source

    Disclosure: maintained by this board's author

    Grade A

    low divergence (1.5%) · covers 98.3% of the suite

    diverged 0.6 percentage points more
    Tier breakdown
    Tier 1 · Core 0.7% diverges
    100.0% covered
    Tier 2 · Complete 1.3% diverges
    90.9% covered 14 unsupported
    Tier 3 · Strict 2.8% diverges
    100.0% covered
  3. ExtendDB
    v0.1.1 42 unsupported ; covers 94.9% of the suite

    Runs via: source

    Grade B

    moderate divergence (10.8%) · covers 94.9% of the suite

    diverged 0.3 percentage points more
    Tier breakdown
    Tier 1 · Core 12.0% diverges
    100.0% covered
    Tier 2 · Complete 7.8% diverges
    72.7% covered 42 unsupported
    Tier 3 · Strict 10.7% diverges
    100.0% covered
  4. Ministack
    65f91ff15e63

    Runs via: pip, Docker, source

    Grade B

    moderate divergence (11.0%) · covers 100.0% of the suite

    diverged 0.4 percentage points more
    Tier breakdown
    Tier 1 · Core 7.4% diverges
    100.0% covered
    Tier 2 · Complete 17.5% diverges
    100.0% covered
    Tier 3 · Strict 13.1% diverges
    100.0% covered
  5. Floci
    794407b5deee 9 unsupported ; covers 98.9% of the suite

    Runs via: Docker, Homebrew, install script, Scoop, binary, JAR

    Grade B

    moderate divergence (12.3%) · covers 98.9% of the suite

    diverged 0.6 percentage points more
    Tier breakdown
    Tier 1 · Core 6.2% diverges
    100.0% covered
    Tier 2 · Complete 20.8% diverges
    94.2% covered 9 unsupported
    Tier 3 · Strict 17.1% diverges
    100.0% covered
  6. LocalStack
    2026.6.0 8 unsupported ; covers 99.0% of the suite

    Runs via: Docker, pip, Homebrew, binary

    Grade C

    high divergence (16.5%) · covers 99.0% of the suite

    diverged 0.3 percentage points more
    Tier breakdown
    Tier 1 · Core 7.2% diverges
    100.0% covered
    Tier 2 · Complete 11.0% diverges
    94.8% covered 8 unsupported
    Tier 3 · Strict 35.3% diverges
    100.0% covered
  7. DynamoDB Local
    d89f8fcc6b1a 13 unsupported ; covers 98.4% of the suite

    Runs via: Docker, JAR, Maven

    Grade C

    high divergence (17.8%) · covers 98.4% of the suite

    diverged 0.3 percentage points more
    Tier breakdown
    Tier 1 · Core 8.6% diverges
    100.0% covered
    Tier 2 · Complete 13.6% diverges
    91.6% covered 13 unsupported
    Tier 3 · Strict 35.7% diverges
    100.0% covered
  8. Dynalite
    4.0.0 67 unsupported ; covers 91.9% of the suite

    Runs via: npm, npx, embedded

    Grade D

    high divergence (22.3%) · covers 91.9% of the suite · coverage lowers this row to D

    diverged 0.7 percentage points more
    Tier breakdown
    Tier 1 · Core 9.1% diverges
    100.0% covered
    Tier 2 · Complete 49.4% diverges
    56.5% covered 67 unsupported
    Tier 3 · Strict 27.8% diverges
    100.0% covered