5 ms·
We use RDS (they now support Postgres) and Elasticache. The pricing seems reasonable for the performance (I've not done benchmarks if I'm being honest), and yo
by scott_w 13y ago
We use RDS (they now support Postgres) and Elasticache.
The pricing seems reasonable for the performance (I've not done benchmarks if I'm being honest), and you get to treat all your EC2 instances as expendable.
- atonse 13y agoSure - but I'm assuming RDS uses EBS under the covers... I meant rather that is there any other option for persistent data on AWS?
- mikebabineau 13y agoIf you're eschewing EBS because of past problems (like the Oct 2012 outage), you should be aware that RDS is EBS-backed [1]. Also, on EC2, EBS-backed instances boot faster [2]. Of course, you can (and should) still treat EBS-backed instances as expendable. [1] http://aws.amazon.com/rds/faqs/#hardware-scaling http://aws.amazon.com/rds/faqs/#hardware-scaling [2] http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/ComponentsAMIs.html#storage-for-the-root-device http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AWSEC2/latest/UserGuide/Component...
- scott_w 13y agoJust to clarify: I don't eschew RDS because of outage issues, I use RDS because it's much easier to set up and manage compared to doing it yourself. To be honest, I didn't know RDS was backed by EBS but it makes little real difference to me as long as the backup procedures are rock-solid and the performance is acceptable.
- copergi 13y agoAs others pointed out, you use EBS then.