<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring#question3' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener noreferrer'>Customer Verified: Read more.</a>
Top Rated
95 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring#question3' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener noreferrer'>Customer Verified: Read more.</a>
177 Ratings

Amazon RDS

<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring#question3' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener noreferrer'>Customer Verified: Read more.</a>
Top Rated
95 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener noreferrer'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 8.8 out of 101

IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)

<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring#question3' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener noreferrer'>Customer Verified: Read more.</a>
177 Ratings
<a href='https://www.trustradius.com/static/about-trustradius-scoring' target='_blank' rel='nofollow noopener noreferrer'>trScore algorithm: Learn more.</a>
Score 7.8 out of 101

Likelihood to Recommend

Amazon RDS

For a general-purpose workload, RDS is a perfect fit and works really well and takes care of a lot of stuff for you (replication, security, monitoring, scaling, storage, publishing logs to CloudWatch). If you have a read-intensive load though, you should probably think of switching to a NoSQL database service like DocumentDB or DynamoDB.
Alok Patwal profile photo

IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)

This is my current go-to solution where a relational database in the cloud is a requirement. The IBM Cloud Databases PostgreSQL implementation is particular attractive vs. alternatives available from other cloud providers because of relational databases scale "up" well (while generally not scaling "out" well or at all) and IBM is able to offer the ultimate scale-up, the recently available, Hyper Protect DBAAS. I can build today on IBM Cloud Databases for PostgreSQL with the knowledge that in the future, if needed, I can scale up to a solution running on massive Z-Series hardware that is at the same time much more secure (particularly from side-channel attack) than solutions running on Intel hardware.
Jon Tara profile photo

Feature Rating Comparison

Database-as-a-Service

Amazon RDS
IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)
8.1
Automatic software patching
Amazon RDS
IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)
8.1
Database scalability
Amazon RDS
IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)
8.4
Automated backups
Amazon RDS
IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)
8.6
Database security provisions
Amazon RDS
IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)
7.9
Monitoring and metrics
Amazon RDS
IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)
6.6
Automatic host deployment
Amazon RDS
IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)
8.7

Pros

Amazon RDS

  • End-to-end management of your database -- including configuration, handling security, and maintenance.
  • Offers compatibility with many (and the most popular) database technologies -- including but not limited to MySQL, Postgres, Microsoft SQL Server, Oracle DB.
  • Makes backups and replications very easy, which is one of the toughest things to do effectively.
Gabriel Samaroo profile photo

IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)

  • The ease of setup was effortless. For anyone with development experience, a few simple questions such as name and login data will get you set up.
  • The web application to manage cluster settings, billing settings and even introspect the data was simple and most importantly worked all the time. This can not always be said for web interfaces of other products.
No photo available

Cons

Amazon RDS

  • My engineers would be able to speak more thoroughly to the cons. I have only benefited from the fruit of their labor. I can say that, from a Project Management standpoint (interfacing with RDS via a PostgreSQL client and my dashboards), it has only performed well so far.
Kyle Reichelt profile photo

IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)

  • Better cost reports, before just increasing to another tier, thus increasing the price. This is critical for early stage startups, where budget is tight.
  • Add more data center options. As a comparison, a similar service, Aiven.io has dozen more options than Compose (basically all big cloud providers). We moved from AWS to Digital Ocean, which made us stop using Compose, since Compose forces us to be either on IBM or AWS.
Alfred Reinold Baudisch profile photo

Usability

Amazon RDS

Amazon RDS 8.3
Based on 3 answers
I've been using AWS Relational Database Services in several projects in different environments and from the AWS products, maybe this one together to EC2 are my favourite. They deliver what they promise. Reliable, fast, easy and with a fair price (in comparison to commercial products which have obscure license agreements).
Erlon Sousa Pinheiro profile photo

IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)

IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose) 8.7
Based on 3 answers
No answer on this topic is available.

Support

Amazon RDS

Amazon RDS 9.1
Based on 7 answers
Support for overall AWS services is a 10. We had one issue with creating a dev / stage / prod database within Aurora and a quick call with Amazon allowed us to figure out the issues we were having and it was determined it was how we were creating our initial setup of the databases
Matthew King profile photo

IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)

IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose) 7.2
Based on 5 answers
Support is helpful enough, but we haven't always had questions answered in a satisfactory manner. At one time we realized that Compose had stopped taking database snapshots on its two-per-day schedule, and had in fact not taken one for many days. Support recognized the problem and it was fixed, but the lack of proactive checks and the inability to share exactly what happened has caused us to look elsewhere for production work loads
Joshua Dickson profile photo

Alternatives Considered

Amazon RDS

Our other application components are all hosted within Amazon's systems already, and the tight coupling of RDS with the security groups and virtual private cloud offerings made locking down privacy and security much easier than integrating with an outside provider. The deeper support for Postgres also made it easier to make the decision for Amazon as that database was higher on our wish list.
Eric Mann profile photo

IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)

MongoDB is the primary db we use, and Meteor is the primary application framework. Configuring MongoDB to fully support Meteor oplog tailing is a challenge - and when we started looking, Compose was those only MongoDB provider that had turnkey support for Meteor.Since we wanted managed Apache Kafka deployments and Compose doesn't offer Kafka, we found Eventador.io, which offers managed Kafka exclusively. It's a much smaller company and they're constantly updating their GUI console and adding/removing features - which is a mixed blessing. On one hand, it's great to get constant improvements, it's also a little confusing when thing changes or features are removed. Compose on the other hand, was completely "boring" - it was a mature product that did want we needed. Which is exactly what you want out of infrastructure...
Carlo Quiñonez profile photo

Return on Investment

Amazon RDS

  • RDS makes projects much easier. Set up time is decreased, and it is very easy to create and destroy databases as needed for testing.
  • The ability to call AWS tech support for database-level issues and advice is a money saver if you don't have a high-end DBA on your team or need someone else to set things up with a little assistance.
  • It is cheap and easy to grant secure access to your RDS instances to other companies or divisions of your company that use AWS.
No photo available

IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)

  • At the beginning, VERY positive. I didn't know Mongo very well when I started this project, and I needed to get a POC up very quickly. Compose let me basically ignore all database management.
  • Compose basically kept up its end of the deal... until a few months ago when we started pushing the envelope. Latency problems and, despite digging deep into documentation, etc, unable to really understand if/how much our Compose instance was to blame. In the end it wasn't, but trial and error was about all I was able to do with Compose.
  • Globally, Compose had a very good ROI, since it allowed me to offload DB admin at a moment when having to do it would have seriously slowed our progress.
No photo available

Pricing Details

Amazon RDS

General

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

IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)

General

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

Rating Summary

Likelihood to Recommend

Amazon RDS
9.0
IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)
7.9

Likelihood to Renew

Amazon RDS
IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)
8.4

Usability

Amazon RDS
8.3
IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)
8.7

Support

Amazon RDS
9.1
IBM Cloud Databases (formerly Compose)
7.2

Add comparison