What users are saying about
44 Ratings
36 Ratings
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
36 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

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

MariaDB

MariaDB is well suited in scenarios where it is possible to use open source software and scenarios that demands active-active clusters. MariaDB is maintained to date with the latest version of MySQL and will work just like MySQL. All the commands, interfaces, libraries and APIs that exist in MySQL also exist in MariaDB. There is no need to convert the databases to switch to MariaDB. But in critical systems we do not risk using it yet.
Stenio Pereira Filho 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
  • Synchronous multi-master cluster that permits to develop high availability applications
  • Compatible with applications developed to MySQLDB.
  • Not much modification required
  • Quicker security releases. You don't need to wait about 2 or 3 months to security patches.
  • MariaDB is developed fully in the open: all development decisions can be reviewed and debated on a public mailing list of in the public bug tracker
Stenio Pereira Filho profile photo

Cons

  • Just like AWS DynamoDB which is a not a SQL solution and is truly a global DB, it would be great if AWS Aurora can become a global DB. What that means is that it is multi-region multi-master. That way writes to different regions of AWS would all be in sync and available in replicas on different regions.
No photo available
  • We still do not have confidence in using MariaDB in our administrative systems because we do not have experience to use it in critical systems
  • We can consider that It is developed mainly by a small company and the future of MariaDB maybe is uncertain (!) (?).
  • On the other hands, we didn't find other cons of this software
Stenio Pereira Filho profile photo

Usability

No score
No answers yet
No answers on this topic
MariaDB10.0
Based on 2 answers
MariaDB is very usable and stable to be used in production settings as an alternative to MySQL. The shortcomings of SQL are present but well understood in the community, and if the decision were to be made again, I would choose MariaDB over MySQL on future projects.
No photo available

Alternatives Considered

Amazon Aurora is the open source AWS managed relational database service that is lesser in cost than AWS RDS.Both Postgres and MySQL are supported. Hence this is a cheaper and highly reliable service offered by AWS.If you are building applications on AWS then this should cater to all your needs for a relational database.
No photo available
MariaDB is cheaper than Oracle Database and MSSQL server. MySQL owned by Oracle. So MariaDB has too many forks, but enough people in the community. PostgreSQL has a larger community and better administration. However, it s not like MariaDB w/ Galera. MariaDB is not good for OLAP compared to the others. Doesn't not support JSON correctly as one would think.
Anson Abraham profile photo

Return on Investment

  • The costs of Aurora is 5x and 3x less than RDS MySql and Postgres on AWS. Hence tremendous cost savings.
  • Bring up your database in a matter of minutes. This is very crucial for quick solutions on the cloud.
  • Best suited for serverless backend solutions for microservices.
  • Highly secure for banking applications with AWS KMS.
No photo available
  • The fact that's it's open source and free has had a huge impact. We're in the process of moving away from Oracle and their cost per CPU pricing model.
Casey Smith 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

MariaDB

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