3 ms·
I'm not sure what you mean by "running your own on native NVMe" Are you talking about using the managed AWS Relational Database Service or something else? Auror
by mattacular 2y ago
I'm not sure what you mean by "running your own on native NVMe" Are you talking about using the managed AWS Relational Database Service or something else? Aurora can also use instance types with NVMe.
Anyway, that's also ignoring the features that Aurora offers, which is why people pay more for it. The ability to have multi-AZ deployments and auto-scaling of (what can be cross-region) read replicas make it very resilient and it's dead simple to operate what would normally be considered advanced features of a DB cluster.
If you just need a managed Postgres or MySQL traditional single instance and none of those extra features, then obviously you would not need to pay the premium for Aurora. RDS exists for that reason.
- sgarland 2y agoI was referring to running your own DB on hardware with NVMe drives. Obviously you lose every nicety of managed services, but tooling exists to replace it, and you gain stupid amounts of performance. RDS Multi-AZ Cluster gives you much of the advantages of Aurora, but with higher performance and more tuning capabilities, though you are limited to 3 nodes. Tbf 3 nodes is almost certainly enough for most companies. A few hundred thousand QPS would be easily handled by that. Re: cross-region read replicas, eh… if you’ve somehow managed to ensure that every single aspect of your app is capable of withstanding the loss of an entire region – including us-east-1, since most of the control plane functions are there – then sure, maybe. But do you need it? If an entire AWS region drops out, half of the internet goes with it, and you can just blame that. I doubt the small possibility of higher uptime is worth the literal doubling in monthly costs.