What users are saying about
50 Ratings
50 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 8.8 out of 101
29 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 8.4 out of 101

Likelihood to Recommend

Amazon Aurora

Many places where Aurora is well suited:
  • If you are trying to build a serverless backend.
  • Amazon hosted relational database service (RDS). So we do not have to manage the database maintenance.
  • Backup and archival can be done to AWS S3, which is very convenient.
  • It provides high performance and scalability.
  • It's very secure. You could use AWS Key management service (KMS) to encrypt and store data on AWS Aurora.
No photo available

Google Cloud SQL

It is great if you don't want to worry about managing hardware and infrastructure and instead focus your efforts on work directly related to your product's database needs, i.e. schema design, efficient queries, etc. However, if you are dealing with very large data sets, then BigQuery, BigTable, or similar might be better suited for your needs.
No photo available

Feature Rating Comparison

Database-as-a-Service

Amazon Aurora
Google Cloud SQL
8.9
Automatic software patching
Amazon Aurora
Google Cloud SQL
9.5
Database scalability
Amazon Aurora
Google Cloud SQL
8.8
Automated backups
Amazon Aurora
Google Cloud SQL
7.8
Database security provisions
Amazon Aurora
Google Cloud SQL
9.3
Monitoring and metrics
Amazon Aurora
Google Cloud SQL
8.8
Automatic host deployment
Amazon Aurora
Google Cloud SQL
9.0

Pros

Amazon Aurora

  • Amazon Aurora has high availability, since the customer started to use it, the database never had to be left out of service.
  • Amazon Aurora provides frequent and automated upgrades, which makes our database system always up to date on the latest features and security practices
  • Since Amazon Aurora uses MySQL as its core database, it is very easy to find specialized people to work. Amazon’s relational database management system also makes it very easy to expand and create new databases
Vasco Mendes profile photo

Google Cloud SQL

  • Super easy to set up: new instance -> Authorization -> play
  • Automatic backup every night! (Keeps past 7 days as copy as well)
  • Automatic failover, in case your main SQL instance fails, they automatically switch you over.
Kristian Hareland profile photo

Cons

Amazon Aurora

  • I think the biggest point for a project or team to consider is the cost. Although it can scale and descale according to your requirements, still you need to be cautious and have a vision of how big your database is going to be, how complex it is going to be, and how much does latency matter. You need to factor all those decisions before going to spend extra on Amazon Aurora as compared to a simple MYSQL database.
  • It suffers from Clod start which is a very well known aspect of the product. But the recovery part is also not up to the mark. They need to improve on the ability to restore a copy of the backup, but mostly it is seen that the copy is corrupted or not the latest one.
  • It does allow us to add new nodes to the existing cluster but we need to be wary of that the new nodes are read-only nodes. All the functions of write/update will still be carried out by the master node only.
No photo available

Google Cloud SQL

  • Automatic backup validation. The backups are performed on a daily basis within the selected window, however, they are not validated. This means the backup could be reported as successful but ultimately be unusable in a situation where it is needed. We got around this issue by periodically validating on our own by spinning up a box, restoring the backup to the new instance, and then destroying the instance after validation. It's not perfect, but is a good sanity check to make sure our backups are valid in case we do need them.
No photo available

Alternatives Considered

Amazon Aurora

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

Google Cloud SQL

I don't know to be honest, but I think ease of use is their #1 feature.
Kristian Hareland profile photo

Return on Investment

Amazon Aurora

  • 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

Google Cloud SQL

  • Saved about 60% from moving to custom SQL instances
  • 99% faster deployment = lower cost for deployment in man-hours
  • It is hard to add access while doing development on the go.
Kristian Hareland 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

Google Cloud SQL

General

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

Add comparison