What users are saying about
44 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 8.3 out of 101
3 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 8 out of 101

Add comparison

Likelihood to Recommend

Amazon Aurora

Amazon Aurora (as is MySQL) is better suited for light to medium applications considering it still has some performance limitations from MySQL. I would not recommend it for enterprise level use without a carefully constructed backend system (code and database). My company's current backend architecture was not mapped out very well and this leads to performance problems that even Amazon Aurora has not been able to completely sort (although it has been a huge help). Another area where I am finding it beginning to lack is for use in data warehousing. The more rows added, the less performant I'm finding the data warehouse. Although to be fair, Amazon has another product (Redshift) that we are looking to migrate data warehouses into.
No photo available

Postgres Plus Advanced Server

It's great if you are using or wish to use PostgreSQL and need the added performance optimization, security features and developer and DBA tools. If you need compatibility with Oracle it's a must-have. There are many developer features that greatly assist dev teams in integrating and implementing complex middleware. It's great for optimizing complex database queries as well as for scaling. I would recommend Postgres Plus Advanced Server for any software development team that is hitting the limit of what PostgreSQL is capable of and wants to improve performance, security, and gain extra developer tools.
Jonah Dempcy profile photo

Pros

  • Aurora's throughput is great compared to MySQL and MariaDB.
  • Aurora Serverless's pay-per-use makes it very inexpensive when used for services that are idle most of the day. This helps us adhere to the one-database-per-microservice pattern; cost is no longer a concern.
  • Aurora is mostly managed. Administering databases will never be a competitive advantage for my company.
  • Aurora has great integration with other AWS products, like DMS.
No photo available
  • Developer tools including debugging, JSON and XML support, libraries for preferred languages and good examples all facilitated integration and development. Robust features for developers.
  • Security is top notch and supports far beyond what we required for our project, which is a good thing.
  • Performance, throttling, monitoring and optimization are all top notch and helped us keep response times low and save on bandwidth and hosting costs.
Jonah Dempcy profile photo

Cons

  • Cold-starts are part of the Aurora Serverless compromise, but they are painful nonetheless.
  • We're accustomed to sub-second metering for AWS Lambda; Aurora Serverless has 1-minute minimums for resources.
  • Aurora Serverless is compatible with MySQL 5.6. MySQL 5.6 lacks many of the features PostgreSQL users will expect.
No photo available
  • Documentation is excellent but spread out across many resources and can take a while to wade through—would benefit from having more intro level, getting started guides for various languages.
  • Ruby support is excellent but more Ruby examples and beginner-level documentation would be nice.
  • It is sometimes hard to find a community of users on StackOverflow so a larger community, and a dedicated forum with active members to answer questions and work through issues would be nice.
Jonah Dempcy profile photo

Alternatives Considered

Aurora MySQL 5.6 lacks many of the features of PostgreSQL, and even more recent versions of MySQL or MariaDB. You may be able to tolerate these deficiencies; simple OLTP use-cases will be served adequately. Like RDS and DynamoDB, Aurora is managed and integrates well with other AWS products. Amazon Aurora Serverless can be much less expensive than RDS, however.
No photo available
We chose Postgres Plus Advanced Server because we had the finances to do so and needed the robust featureset, along with the power to optimize our performance and integrate with the development tools of our choosing. We audited a number of options, exploring potential solutions at various levels of robustness and decided that this was our best option moving forward.
Jonah Dempcy profile photo

Return on Investment

  • Aurora Serverless has allowed us to inexpensively implement best-practices for our microservices architecture.
  • Aurora is mostly managed; our engineers can focus on features instead of database administration.
  • Aurora is capable of high throughput. Speed is not our first priority, but we still benefit from it.
No photo available
  • Postgres Plus Advanced Server is quite complex and may take longer to implement certain things than simply using PostgreSQL depending on developer familiarity with the platform.
  • Getting up to speed can be daunting so again, there is an upfront cost in time spent learning the platform, besides the potential for extra time spent on a feature-by-feature basis.
  • The cost of Postgres Plus Advanced Server should be weighed against simply using PostgreSQL to decide which is the best solution for your business needs.
Jonah Dempcy profile photo

Pricing Details

Amazon Aurora

General
Free Trial
Free/Freemium Version
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Entry-level set up fee?
No
Additional Pricing Details

Postgres Plus Advanced Server

General
Free Trial
Free/Freemium Version
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
Entry-level set up fee?
No
Additional Pricing Details