Best performance, at a cost
June 27, 2023
Best performance, at a cost
Score 8 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User
Overall Satisfaction with Amazon Aurora
Amazon does offer two relational database services, namely RDS and Aurora. While both very similar, there are key differences in how they persist data on disk. RDS uses EBS volumes, which are limited up to 16k concurrent IOPS. On the other hand, Aurora uses a virtual storage cluster that supports up to 80k concurrent IOPS. When dealing with large clients whose database usage might exceed the 16 concurrent IOPS threshold, Aurora was the preferred choice to ensure higher availability.
- High-availability
- Multi-AZ configuration
- Serverless support
- Crash recovery
- Asynchronous replication lag
- Opaque pricing
Overall Satisfaction Continued
- Lower administration cost
- Better visibility on database usage
- Faster development time
- Higher cost per IOPS
- Amazon Relational Database Service (RDS), Azure SQL Database and Linode
Because most of our resources were already deployed within our AWS account, we wanted to have everything under the same umbrella. Moreover, AWS workload identity layer was crucial in providing passwordless authentication to our Aurora endpoints.
Do you think Amazon Aurora delivers good value for the price?
Not sure
Are you happy with Amazon Aurora's feature set?
Yes
Did Amazon Aurora live up to sales and marketing promises?
I wasn't involved with the selection/purchase process
Did implementation of Amazon Aurora go as expected?
Yes
Would you buy Amazon Aurora again?
Yes