|
|
|
|
|
by reilly3000
2317 days ago
|
|
RDS can scale read replicas and fail over to master, but aurora and it’s serverless option is much better for auto-scaling. Behind the scenes storage is decoupled from compute with makes scaling fundamentally easier. EC2 is your only choice if you want a database that AWS doesn’t support, such as Rethink or Cassandra (they just recently launched a managed Cassandra service though). EC2 is also your only choice if you need full control of the DB, such as using many Postgres extensions and foreign data wrappers. Even some triggers and UDFs are limited. A self-managed, auto-scaling, cross-AZ replicated DB setup is no small matter with EC2. Not to mention logging, metrics, patching of the DB and underlying OS. It’s 100% doable, but one should only proceed with that course with understanding of the human costs. Personally, I’ve been choosing FaunaDB these days when possible. It’s a no-ops managed service and has on-prem/VPC options. I just write graphQL clients and move on with my life, the rest just works. |
|
When it scales up, queries start to fail and there are long delays. I had to add a try/retry loop around all my inserts to avoid losing data.
I definitely wouldn't recommend it for bursty applications where it needs to rapidly scale up.
The thing that bugs me is that I know a similar workload works fine on a relatively cheap c3.xlarge so I'm not actually saving much money with Aurora.