TrustRadius
Amazon Relational Database Service (Amazon RDS) is a database-as-a-service (DBaaS) from Amazon Web Services.https://dudodiprj2sv7.cloudfront.net/product-logos/7S/Sk/S1ZU73KQB51G.pngI can't think of a reason not to use Amazon RDS (especially Aurora)We use RDS to run all the databases to run our platform for both OLTP and analytics/reporting purposes. This includes traditional PostgresSQL Aurora PostgeSQL. and Aurora MySQL implementations.,RDS provides high availability databases without having to manage your own servers. Amazon Aurora in particular is a breakthrough database technology, and in particular with the PostgreSQL engine provides advanced features at a fraction of the cost of an Oracle implementation, with better features that have been designed from the ground up to support the cloud. Aurora also allows supports large clusters of database servers easily, with super fast replication (~20 ms), and flexibility to allow changing resources provisioned based on workload.,Cross-Region replication is supported for most platforms and engines, but is not available across the board yet. Where it is available it provides an excellent solution for disaster recovery.,10,Very positive. It has reduced our need to have IT Operations and DBA resources, and with Aurora we have been able to get better performance with less compute power required (that is, with a lower monthly spend).,Microsoft SQL Server, Oracle Database and MySQL,.NET, Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2), Amazon ElastiCache, Amazon CloudFrontA developer's take on AWS RDSAmazon RDS is one of the primary data stores for all applications in our organisation. We also use AWS DynamoDB, Elastic Search, Redis etc apart from RDS. We preferred RDS over other DBaaS because it's a part of AWS which is highly reliable and scalable, and it is a completely managed solution which is simple, easy to use and also offers advanced features required by DevOps team.,Zero manual configuration, you can get an instance up and running in just 5 minutes. High scalability (RDS simplifies setting up master-slave cluster) and reliability (Multi AZ replications). Automatic backups so that we don't have to worry about losing data.,Hard to debug performance issues at times since it is a managed service and we don't have all privileges.,8,We do not require dedicated database admins, which saves both money and man power. It's easy for developers to manage infrastructure thanks to RDS.,AWS Lambda, Amazon API Gateway, AWS Elastic BeanstalkRDS to the rescue. Let You're DBAs be DBAs, rather than Server AdministratorsOur company has a cloud-first and AWS first strategy that includes creating and moving databases to the public cloud. We started this journey seriously about 2 years ago and have decided to use RDS services as often as possible, instead of using EC2 instances for our database environments. While our footprint in the public cloud is still a small part of our overall compute, we are finding that RDS is meeting our database needs are we are migrating and creating new ones. RDS is not only solving issues for the operations of our business, we are also using RDS as part of our overall data lake strategy.,Getting the data in and out of our databases, especially with the close integration RDS has with S3 buckets. Less overall management of the database servers. Our DBAs are now do more DBA work than server admin work, which moves them higher on the value chain. Performance and Scalability.,Some of the RDS (like Redshift) still lack a SQL programming language like t-SQL, but are getting better all the time. Depending on the database chosen, pricing is still dictated by the vendor like Oracle or SQL-server. For problem deep in the system, not having machine access can be problematic.,10,Positive - Move to Redshift from Oracle could save us up to 50% annually on database licensing Positive - Move to Aurora is helping us save on on premise support we pay for mySQL Negative - still, hard to find a true cost of ownership until several months of use under you're belt,Amazon Elastic Compute Cloud (EC2),Slack, Tableau Desktop, SAP PowerDesignerRock solid cloud database hosting.We use amazon RDS to offload database systems from the primary server stack. This is particularly useful for us in 2 scenarios: 1. You are running server clusters and the database needs to be external to those clusters for consistency. 2. You are operating some shared services and need to sandbox a particular set of data or application.,It's quite easy to set up and provision new RDS instances. Setting up multi-zone failover tolerant databases is literally just a couple mouse clicks. Databases are automatically backed up and have minor version upgrades applied. Set and forget.,We have at times dealt with a few latency issues between RDS and our server instances even when they are in the same zone. This isn't a big deal if you're appropriately caching, but if you were to run a CMS, say Drupal, without caching on RDS from an EC2 instance it could be quite a bit slower than using a single box. Occasionally Amazon will depreciate a particular version and you are forced to "do some work" to migrate your database in a time period you may not have anticipated. Not sure there is any way around this for anybody, but it's a thing to think about.,8,Much less time spent managing database versions, restores, cloning and uptime. Allows us to create server clusters which can push our business goals. Allows us to push the envelope of what's possible in our backend systems.,Rackspace and MySQLReliable web databases at scaleWe use Amazon RDS as the backing data store for our various microservices as well as the utilities that manage service scheduling and system availability. Our primary databases are configured with Postgres, but our management utilities use MySQL under the hood. In production, we also use a high-availability configuration with automated failover to a backup system. This is all to say we use RDS extensively in our organization and the reliability of the platform provides both us and our customers with piece of mind.,Multiple availability zones for high assurance of uptime Both hosted and local management/reporting utilities Integration with CloudWatch and CloudFormation for automated creation and real-time performance metrics,Postgres, in particular, is configured in such a way as to prevent access to the `postgres` user. Considering things like database extensions are installed under this user, if extensions ever need to be removed/modified, you have to rebuild and migrate your entire database! Cross-system database migrations are somewhat slow and, in many cases, require a great deal of manual work to ensure data type information (i.e. UUIDs or Integers) is properly set-post migration (otherwise many types are re-cast to strings).,9,Our databases are highly reliable, meaning our systems team can focus on other business endeavors rather than maintenance.,SQL Azure,AWS Lambda, Amazon DynamoDB, JIRA Software
Unspecified
Amazon Relational Database Service
67 Ratings
Score 8.3 out of 101
TRScore

Amazon RDS Reviews

Amazon RDS
67 Ratings
Score 8.3 out of 101
Top Rated Award
Show Filters 
Hide Filters 
Filter 67 vetted Amazon RDS reviews and ratings
Clear all filters
Overall Rating
Reviewer's Company Size
Last Updated
By Topic
Industry
Department
Experience
Job Type
Role
Reviews (1-15 of 15)
  Vendors can't alter or remove reviews. Here's why.
Tim Weisbrod profile photo
September 06, 2018

Review: "I can't think of a reason not to use Amazon RDS (especially Aurora)"

Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We use RDS to run all the databases to run our platform for both OLTP and analytics/reporting purposes. This includes traditional PostgresSQL Aurora PostgeSQL. and Aurora MySQL implementations.
  • RDS provides high availability databases without having to manage your own servers.
  • Amazon Aurora in particular is a breakthrough database technology, and in particular with the PostgreSQL engine provides advanced features at a fraction of the cost of an Oracle implementation, with better features that have been designed from the ground up to support the cloud.
  • Aurora also allows supports large clusters of database servers easily, with super fast replication (~20 ms), and flexibility to allow changing resources provisioned based on workload.
  • Cross-Region replication is supported for most platforms and engines, but is not available across the board yet. Where it is available it provides an excellent solution for disaster recovery.
If you want to run a database in the cloud, RDS is definitely the way to go. I have not come across any scenarios that would indicate a better option.
Read Tim Weisbrod's full review
Arjun Komath profile photo
August 31, 2018

Amazon RDS Review: "A developer's take on AWS RDS"

Score 8 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
Amazon RDS is one of the primary data stores for all applications in our organisation. We also use AWS DynamoDB, Elastic Search, Redis etc apart from RDS. We preferred RDS over other DBaaS because it's a part of AWS which is highly reliable and scalable, and it is a completely managed solution which is simple, easy to use and also offers advanced features required by DevOps team.
  • Zero manual configuration, you can get an instance up and running in just 5 minutes.
  • High scalability (RDS simplifies setting up master-slave cluster) and reliability (Multi AZ replications).
  • Automatic backups so that we don't have to worry about losing data.
  • Hard to debug performance issues at times since it is a managed service and we don't have all privileges.
RDS removes the headache of maintaining and monitoring database instances, we do not have to worry about replication, backup and restore, updating the database etc as it's fully managed by AWS. So if you want to focus more on building the actual software rather than worrying about the infrastructure, RDS is a highly recommended.
Read Arjun Komath's full review
No photo available
August 30, 2018

Amazon RDS Review: "RDS to the rescue. Let You're DBAs be DBAs, rather than Server Administrators"

Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
Our company has a cloud-first and AWS first strategy that includes creating and moving databases to the public cloud. We started this journey seriously about 2 years ago and have decided to use RDS services as often as possible, instead of using EC2 instances for our database environments. While our footprint in the public cloud is still a small part of our overall compute, we are finding that RDS is meeting our database needs are we are migrating and creating new ones. RDS is not only solving issues for the operations of our business, we are also using RDS as part of our overall data lake strategy.
  • Getting the data in and out of our databases, especially with the close integration RDS has with S3 buckets.
  • Less overall management of the database servers. Our DBAs are now do more DBA work than server admin work, which moves them higher on the value chain.
  • Performance and Scalability.
  • Some of the RDS (like Redshift) still lack a SQL programming language like t-SQL, but are getting better all the time.
  • Depending on the database chosen, pricing is still dictated by the vendor like Oracle or SQL-server.
  • For problem deep in the system, not having machine access can be problematic.
Redshift RDS - Data Lakes and Data Warehouses
Aurora RDS - nice alternative to mySQL or Postgres, but skill the performance and features of those other engines
DynamoDB RDS - scalability and flexibility like other no-SQL database
Read this authenticated review
Justin Schroeder profile photo
December 01, 2017

Amazon RDS Review: "Rock solid cloud database hosting."

Score 8 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We use amazon RDS to offload database systems from the primary server stack. This is particularly useful for us in 2 scenarios:

1. You are running server clusters and the database needs to be external to those clusters for consistency.
2. You are operating some shared services and need to sandbox a particular set of data or application.
  • It's quite easy to set up and provision new RDS instances.
  • Setting up multi-zone failover tolerant databases is literally just a couple mouse clicks.
  • Databases are automatically backed up and have minor version upgrades applied.
  • Set and forget.
  • We have at times dealt with a few latency issues between RDS and our server instances even when they are in the same zone. This isn't a big deal if you're appropriately caching, but if you were to run a CMS, say Drupal, without caching on RDS from an EC2 instance it could be quite a bit slower than using a single box.
  • Occasionally Amazon will depreciate a particular version and you are forced to "do some work" to migrate your database in a time period you may not have anticipated. Not sure there is any way around this for anybody, but it's a thing to think about.
Reach for amazon RDS if you're looking to offload your database to an dedicated server. This is really important for just about any database-backed system that relies on multiple server instances. If you can afford it, it's also a good solution for simply running a database instead of co-locating one on your application server because it takes so much of the guesswork out of management.
Read Justin Schroeder's full review
Eric Mann profile photo
September 20, 2017

Amazon RDS Review: "Reliable web databases at scale"

Score 9 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We use Amazon RDS as the backing data store for our various microservices as well as the utilities that manage service scheduling and system availability. Our primary databases are configured with Postgres, but our management utilities use MySQL under the hood. In production, we also use a high-availability configuration with automated failover to a backup system. This is all to say we use RDS extensively in our organization and the reliability of the platform provides both us and our customers with piece of mind.
  • Multiple availability zones for high assurance of uptime
  • Both hosted and local management/reporting utilities
  • Integration with CloudWatch and CloudFormation for automated creation and real-time performance metrics
  • Postgres, in particular, is configured in such a way as to prevent access to the `postgres` user. Considering things like database extensions are installed under this user, if extensions ever need to be removed/modified, you have to rebuild and migrate your entire database!
  • Cross-system database migrations are somewhat slow and, in many cases, require a great deal of manual work to ensure data type information (i.e. UUIDs or Integers) is properly set-post migration (otherwise many types are re-cast to strings).
Amazon RDS is well suited if you need a highly-available, cloud-hosted, scalable database for websites or web applications. It can grow to serve as many queries as you need (at a cost) and is easy to configure. That being said, RDS can get expensive quickly depending on your use. If you're hosting a simple website or blog, it would be cheaper to stand up a database inside the EC2 instance powering the application. If you're not working with a lot of data, RDS can potentially be overkill for your needs.
Read Eric Mann's full review
Dharma raju profile photo
November 09, 2017

Amazon RDS Review: "For High availability -Relational Database Service are optimized solution"

Score 8 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
RDS manages replication if databases are in multiple-avaliable zones.
  • Easy to handle master and slave nodes
  • Synchronization of data between the instances
  • Easy to administrate with AWS console
  • RDS is much more expensive than MySQL+EC2.
It is less appropriate if you enjoy headaches and tuning every last little bit for maximum performance.
Read Dharma raju's full review
Corwin Cole profile photo
September 11, 2017

Amazon RDS Review: "RDS: Secure, scalable, and universally trusted"

Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
Amazon RDS holds and manages data for our core operations. We accept somewhat sensitive data: PII, but nothing PCI-protected. The well-vetted security of the service, along with its outstanding configurability, make it a perfect option for maintaining trust with our clients. RDS easily upgrades when we need to scale and was seemingly built with the expectation that it would fit neatly into an event-driven architecture. Automatic backups, read replication, everything is exceptional. I'm trying to think of a complaint or drawback, but I can't.
  • RDS received provisional FedRAMP-High Authorization in January of 2017. When our clients ask us how our data is encrypted and secured, we mention that it's encrypted at rest on Amazon RDS, and that (so far) has instantly established trust in every instance.
  • RDS makes everything easy - automatic backups, encryption at rest (above a certain service tier), ultra-fast upgrades, and excellent configurations for event hooks and logging.
  • RDS is impressively fast and available. Our RDS instance literally has never had a failure or problem of any kind.
  • It's really hard to think of any areas for improvement. I think the console could maybe use a simpler interface or walkthrough for newer users who know what they want, but are unfamiliar with the technical terminology.
  • It would be great to be able to automatically spawn a lower-tier RDS instance for staging and development environments, mirroring the functionality of the higher-tier production environment but minimizing costs.
  • Because DynamoDB is not encrypted at rest (yet), it would be really nice to see more documentation about creating simple, semi-serverless applications with an RDS-Lambda-API Gateway setup.
RDS is outstanding for sensitive data, e.g. user credentials and PII, because you can get excellent encryption at rest and security features for relatively little expense. For simple data structures and relationships, I highly recommend RDS. For more complex and intricately interrelated structures, DynamoDB is probably a better offering, but its lack of at-rest encryption makes it inappropriate for credentials, PII, etc.

RDS also integrates extremely well with ElasticBeanstalk, Lambda, and so on, and has functionality to trigger and/or respond to events from other AWS services, such as SQS.
Read Corwin Cole's full review
Anudeep Palanki profile photo
September 05, 2017

Amazon RDS Review: "Best SaaS solution in market"

Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
As a part of the shift in the organization from moving away from Oracle to open-source systems, we started developing micro services. The micro service architecture emphasizes on small sized databases and APIs that control access to the data. So in the pre-micro service era where we have one monolith DB that's managed by Infrastructure teams, the new architecture demands new DBs. Traditionally speaking, spawning new robust and production ready databases used to be difficult. For developers, it involves procurement of hardware, connecting it to the network, installing new DB software, setting up robust backup scripts for the data; which is a lot of work. Amazon RDS offers SaaS to replace the above work, making it super easy for a developer to spawn a new instance by filling up a short form and clicking a button.
  • Making it super easy to spin up new instances. It's as simple as filling up a form and clicking a button.
  • RDS offers a catalog of popular databases to choose from. This provides options for companies that have code that's strongly coupled with a database and for developers to try new databases to solve a problem.
  • RDS takes care of creating backup scripts and multi zoning your data for making the database robust.
  • RDS ties really well into the rest of Amazon's security model, making the data secure.
  • Currently RDS does not offer a No-SQL DB management through RDS. They have their DynamoDB offering for No-SQL, but I wish RDS offers popular No-SQL DB's like MongoDB in their offerings.
  • RDS does not provide access to the Virtual Machine. It provides access to the database instance but not to the VM that Database resides in. This is kind of a nice to have as it would allow for fine grained performance tuning of the DB.
  • Unifying RDS security by combining instance security model with AWS IAM model. Currently to manage an RDS instance you have to have two security models in place, one, to secure access to RDS through IAM and the other to secure access to the Database through the Database's own security.
RDS would be an excellent fit if:
  • The database you are looking for is offered in RDS catalog.
  • Have rest of the systems tied up with the AWS.
RDS would not be a great fit if:
  • The database is not offered in Catalog
  • You need to be up-to-date with the latest versions of the DB.
  • You need to customize the database by installing plugins thats not offered by version on RDS.
  • You need to customize the database in any other manner.
Read Anudeep Palanki's full review
No photo available
July 25, 2017

Amazon RDS Review: "Are you using a SQL database, having issues scaling up, why not try RDS?"

Score 7 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We use Amazon RDS very heavily in our company. It's being used by the database management team most of the times, however, to interact with the service we often try to write APIs to access the database. Currently, the main business problem it overcomes is the problem of scaling and adding new hardware, if we are running out of space. We don't really need to worry about buying new hardware, we just increase the size without any issues.
  • Amazon RDS is exceptionally good as it offers a wide variety of database engines.
  • Adding the security model to the RDS instance is amazing, you don't need to worry setting up SQL managers and servers for this purpose of handling security, it can be easily done using the security groups.
  • You can place the database instance in public/private subnets as needed, and it's easily accessible remotely which I feel is another big advantage.
  • Personally, I feel, RDS though it scales much, the pricing is too expensive, if the pricing for larger instance types are reduced, it would be much better.
If your application is hosted on AWS, it's best to have the database in RDS. Or if you have plans of migrating your traditional application which uses MySQL, to AWS, then, in that case, using Amazon RDS is a good option. Also, you could use AWS Lambda to make it serverless if needed.
Read this authenticated review
Valeri Karpov profile photo
March 28, 2017

Amazon RDS Review: "Great for a quick analytics database, wouldn't use it for production though"

Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
Amazon Relational Database Service (RDS) hosts a Postgres instance that we send our production MongoDB data into. We then use metabase (http://www.metabase.com/) on top of RDS for analytics. MongoDB hosts all our production data and is the source of truth, but we copy that data into RDS because most of our non-technical staff are not proficient with MongoDB's aggregation framework and because we don't want to risk an errant query hurting our production database's performance.
  • Quick and easy hosting for SQL databases. Setting up Postgres locally is a nightmare and we don't have experience managing it, RDS has made it easy.
  • Easy to set up tools like MySQL to pipe your real production data into RDS.
  • Gives you a nice neat Postgres URI that you can point metabase, wagon, etc., at for analytics.
  • RDS is expensive compared to running a self-hosted SQL database on EC2 (once you get past the generous free tier). Currently the cheapest on-demand RDS instance costs $0.041 / hour, whereas EC2 t1.nano instances cost $0.006 / hour. $29/mo seems expensive given that we have no need for blazing performance or multi-availability-zone durability.
  • I don't believe traditional RDBMS have any business being production databases in this day and age, so I find RDS' focus on performance and durability to be wasteful and distracting.
  • Like most AWS products, the documentation is exceptionally complex and difficult to navigate, and the UI displays an awful lot of superfluous information.
I think RDS is a great solution for hosting an SQL analytics database if you're not big enough to justify using Redshift and want to avoid Redshift's limitations. Getting set up is pretty easy once you've digested the somewhat unclear documentation, and I've had no complaints about the service's reliability. Setting up and managing Postgres is a nightmare, so I was thrilled that Amazon could do it for me. However, I wouldn't trust it to run your production data, because I wouldn't recommend a relational database for running your production in general.
Read Valeri Karpov's full review
Michael E. Gruen profile photo
March 14, 2017

Amazon RDS Review: "RDS is the easy, scalable option, provided you don't need to do too much voodoo"

Score 8 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We use RDS (MySQL and Postgres) for important production systems in our backend data systems. It solves the problem of not having to maintain (patch, upgrade, clean) an installation of our databases, freeing up our DBA resources to work on more important things. Further, it is fast, easily scalable, and very reliable.
  • Easy to scale. Need more concurrent connections or more space? Reconfigure and relaunch. This allows us to start small and have room to scale.
  • Easy to maintain. While db exploits aren't as common as OS-level issues, they do come up. With RDS, upgrades happen automatically. It's quite nice.
  • Easy to work with. If you're not doing anything crazy with your database and just need it to work, RDS just works. Sometimes, your user permissions might need to be set a little oddly due to how RDS admins are set up, but it's a minor nit.
  • Not fully configurable. It's a hosted service and you sometimes needs to work around RDS's rules, especially when it comes to administrating the service. But, it's similar to AWS's general architecture, so not a huge issue.
  • Aurora is the "better" service from a performance perspective. From a cost perspective, RDS is fine and will likely improve over time.
  • Cheaper to run your own database on your own instance, but I'm really stretching for a con here as it's relatively so inexpensive.
If you can host your stuff in the cloud, AWS RDS is probably the best go-to that I've worked with to date. It is flexible enough for most applications, includes enough SQL dialects (MySQL, Postgres, et al) to satisfy any engineer who wants to work with a relational database for general purposes. It's also useful for smaller data warehousing. For larger applications and analytics warehousing, use Redshift or similar. RDS will fail/be slow. There are better, specialty products for this.
Read Michael E. Gruen's full review
Craig Nash profile photo
March 14, 2017

Amazon RDS Review: "Setting up a basic LAMP on AWS? I encourage you to consider RDS."

Score 4 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
I support a lot of clients that have AWS, and a large amount of them rely upon the free-tier of services. I think the free tier is an awesome offer by AWS, but the services included, especially EC-2, are fairly under-powered, and are really designed for educational use. The average WordPress user trying to gt free hosting by using the free tier of EC2 is going to run into huge problems very fast. These sites bog down quite a bit very quickly after going live, especially on AWS, since unlike BlueMix and Softlayer, an EC2 processor is not even an entire physical core (based on my readings and test). I am an AWS consulting partner, and I get these exact types of clients reaching out to me a lot. They see people running nice sites on the free tier, but they just can't get it to work. RDS is the biggest secret weapon, and the first one I use each time. When you deploy a LAMP on EC2, forget the M. RDS is a specialized AWS database system, but to keep it simple, it is a ready-to-go, point-and-click MySQL server. Yes, you can run your web database on RDS, and offload resources, freeing up some of that 512 MB of ram, and single partial core processor to focus on serving websites and PHP requests. Honestly, RDS should be an essential service for every LAMP deployment you do on AWS. It not only removes the load from a low-powered server, but offers incredibly simple administration, has automatic back-up and restoration services, offers additional availability, and is a great way of being CMS ready for migrating your site to AWS CloudFront.
  • Replaces local MySQL service running on the EC-2 server, reducing server load.
  • Offers easy administration of your database services, and fast DB deployment times.
  • Offers ready-to-go backup/restoration, high-availability services, load balancing and many other services that don't come with standard MySQL server.
  • Can be scaled just as easily, and independently of the EC-2 instance.
  • RDS is usually equal in price to the addition EC-2 cost if you ran MySQL locally on EC-2, while offering more services.
  • Migration, import/export, and support for third-party MySql services is not good.
  • RDS is very limited in size, and options, but is perfect for standard MySQL uses, such as replacing MySql in a web server.
  • It can rapidly become expensive, sondon't useit if you are expecting a lot of growth.
Specifically, and the only time I recommend and endorse RDS is to replace the MySQL service in a standard LAMP server. This is the primary use, and neither myself, not anyone else I know has used it for any other purposes.
Read Craig Nash's full review
Michael Jipping profile photo
March 09, 2017

Amazon RDS Review: "AWS RDS for Testing and POC"

Score 9 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We used Amazon Relational Database Service to administer an SQL Server versus hosting it on site. This was a project aimed at testing functionality for a highly available failover HL7 system. It met our expectations for managing the database for this application. When we were finished with this Proof of Concept project we decided the latency was too great at the moment and would wait for improved infrastructure improvements to the AWS Cloud. The best part of the whole exercise is that we were able to terminate the instance and only run it while we were testing. No major infrastructure investment was required other than the time we used the instance.
  • It is flexible for when you need it and how you need it. You can configure it to meet your requirements for performance and relaibility.
  • Ease of set up, just a few clicks with a secure communication.
  • The ability for use over our VPN by name versus IP would have been one of the features we would have liked to have.
[It's well suited] when you need a flexible solution that will not require you to invest heavily in equipment and software for testing, QA, or development. A high I/O or low latency requirement may not be the best use case for this product. In time this will all improve. Not all applications function in the cloud either so make sure you work with your vendor if it's a third party integration.
Read Michael Jipping's full review
Josh Q profile photo
March 27, 2017

Amazon RDS Review: "RDS. Dead simple database administration"

Score 9 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We use it as a backend for web applications running in AWS. Using RDS over traditional database servers eliminates much of the administration overhead while providing easy and reliable backups and replication.
  • Built in real-time backups
  • Uncomplicated replication
  • Easy performance tuning
  • Secure disk
  • No access to underlying OS
  • MS SQL poorly supported
Using it for MySQL or postgresql is a no brainier. MS SQL and Oracle support may not be a fit depending on use case.
Read Josh Q's full review
Eric Humphrey profile photo
November 17, 2015

Amazon RDS Review: "RDS is a great PaaS database solution"

Score 9 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Review Source
We use Amazon ealational Database Service as a backend for a handful of internal applications. The advantages of using a PaaS RDBMS are many. Amazon handles backups, patching and upgrades. And since we use multi availability zone deployments, uptime is not a concern either. Are there downsides? Sure. We would like to see the option to keep backups longer than 30 days. There are workarounds, but we would rather it be built into the product. Another potential downside is the lack of control over upgrades. While this is almost always a good thing, there are cases where a legacy schema may depend on an older version.

All in all Amazon Relational Database Service is a great service. No complaints!
  • Automatic patching
  • Automatic backup
  • Mult-az HA deployment
  • Extend the retention time for backups
  • Provide an option to freeze a db version
If your application relies on legacy database engine features, you may not want to use Amazon Relational Database Service. If you are under regulatory (or business, for that matter) requirements to retain database backups for longer than 30 days, are you capable of writing a workaround? Are database dumps sufficient, or do you need file level backups?
Read Eric Humphrey's full review

Amazon RDS Scorecard Summary

About Amazon RDS

Amazon Relational Database Service (Amazon RDS) is a database-as-a-service (DBaaS) from Amazon Web Services.

Amazon RDS Technical Details

Operating Systems: Unspecified
Mobile Application:No