Skip to content

DynamoDB Local on

docs.aws.amazon.com/amazondynamodb/latest/developerguide/DynamoDBLocal.html

6ada631ec7aa as measured in this run

Grade D
high divergence · coverage lowers this row to D
answers 24.1% of the suite differently from real DynamoDB
95.3% covered · 79 unsupported
Tier 1 · Core 7.6% diverges
100.0% covered
38 of 497 attempted
Tier 2 · Complete 11.9% diverges
86.5% covered 61 unsupported
54 of 391 attempted
Tier 3 · Strict 42.8% diverges
97.5% covered 18 unsupported
312 of 711 attempted

How it got here

DynamoDB Local's history up to this run, ending on the figures above. Both are plotted because neither reads correctly alone: divergence falls when a target stops attempting an operation it used to get wrong, so a fall in the first plot is only an improvement if the second one holds. The target's own page carries the full history.

Divergence

DynamoDB Local divergence up to 2026-10-22 0% 15% 30% divergence - lower is better 25 Apr 25 May 16 Jun 22 Jun 29 Jun 6 Jul 16 Jul 21 Jul 28 Jul 12 Aug 18 Aug 30 Aug 29 Sep 22 Oct 24.1%
Diverging on 24.1% of the suite as of 22 Oct. Lower is better, so a falling line is a target getting closer to real DynamoDB.

Coverage

DynamoDB Local coverage up to 2026-10-22 92% 96% 100% coverage - higher is better 25 Apr 25 May 16 Jun 22 Jun 29 Jun 6 Jul 16 Jul 21 Jul 28 Jul 12 Aug 18 Aug 30 Aug 29 Sep 22 Oct 95.3%
Implementing 95.3% of the suite as of 22 Oct, as little as 93.8% on 21 Aug. Higher is better. This is the share of the suite's tests a target implements at all. A fail becoming a skip leaves both numerators over the same fixed denominator, so a fall here is matched point for point by a fall in divergence: withdrawal costs exactly as much coverage as it gains divergence.

Where it fell short on this date

The tests this run recorded as failing, each linked to its source at the commit that measured it. For the current picture, see this target's latest results, or every target in this run.