The only direct comparison that I have professionally would be from a past life where we ran Microsoft SQL Server on Microsoft Servers, and while I served as a technical liaison between a vendor and my customers, there were constant issues within my customers' technical teams …
We used to have On-Premises servers with Microsoft SQL Server and MySQL databases. We used that for years, and we had a hard time and a lot of work involved in securing and updating the server. And not no mention that growth involves a lot of calculations and extra costs. …
we could use Azure SQL for our project but as our other parts of the solutions existed on AWS, it was a better choice to have AWS RDS or else traffic exiting AWS would have taken a lot of cloud changes. Microsoft SQL Server requires license, either core-based or full license …
In a few words, we are just to confortable working with oracle and sql server. Using RDS add another layer of distributed database in order to backup everything we have in case of a disaster and also complies with authorities locally and internacionally. All database we use, …
We needed to use PostgreSQL due to it being the database engine that our application vendor uses. Once we were constrained on the database engine choice then Microsoft products (eg. SQL Server), whether on premise or in the cloud, were not appropriate. Therefore the only …
Even though Amazon Relational Database Service (RDS) is costlier than postgre SQL, We prefer Amazon Relational Database Service (RDS) just because of high performance and security features
We prefer RDS to spin up our own MySQL instances via traditional servers, EC2 instances, or containers, and RDS provides all of our DB needs compared to other database products AWS offers. As mentioned, the manageable, operational, security, and reliability features of RDS that …
Actually you can have most of these tools through AWS Relational Database Service as they are basically those technologies provided as a service. It is way better to have those products provided as a service through a huge and reliable infrastructure like AWS.
It's hard to identify how Amazon RDS stacks up against the databases they support, because to install and use a relational database in a production environment you need a Database Administrator to help install, configure and manage. Amazon RDS keeps the details simple enough …
Amazon Relational Database Service will probably give you everything you need from a traditional manual DB setup, except everything is managed for you. The only downside is having to pay the premium for the service; however, the trade-off of not having to deal with the …
RDS provides all the features of databases you could host yourself, without all of the maintenance and headaches required, while providing more flexibility and lower TCO.
Automated snap-shotting every 24 hours is, again something that I could just set up in minutes with a few clicks, though we also backup on cron jobs to elsewhere, and, because of our industry we have a HUGE "forensic logs" that initially live in the database but get archived …
SQL Server is way ahead of the support available and documentation available. Oracle should invest heavily in bringing good technical books on MySQL rather than putting documentation online and expect users to go through it.
Easy to manage all tools without extra cost is a big …