Amazon Aurora Reviews

Amazon Aurora stands out for its ease of use in a managed environment, inbuilt security, continuous backups, numerous read replicas, multi-region automated replication, and seamless integration with other AWS services. 

While Amazon Aurora meets your current scaling and storage needs, there is room for improvement in cryptography and scalability compared to other databases. Although the instances you're using now are sufficient, there's potential for better scalability and enhanced cryptographic features.

I did face a problem related to not enabling auto-scaling. When the storage reached its limit, the database went down. We had to either increase the instance size or add more Aurora replicas. These were architectural oversights or steps that were missed during the initial setup, but there was nothing inherently wrong with Amazon Aurora.

I have been using Amazon Aurora for three years.

I rate the solution’s scalability a six out of ten.

We have faced AWS environment issues, particularly service disruptions in some regions or availability zones. For example, during a project, we experienced a problem in the North Virginia region: All EC2 instances in one or two availability zones shut down, and Aurora became unreachable. This impacted our applications significantly, as we couldn't reach any of the EC2 instances, and API issues arose. Later, we learned that a power failure in the data center was the cause.

After this experience, we adjusted our architecture to include more than two availability zones and adopted a multi-region strategy to avoid relying on a single region. These changes helped mitigate similar issues in the future.

Aurora support is based on the subscription level you choose. For instance, you can expect around-the-clock availability if you opt for a 24/7 support plan. With this subscription level, the support team responds to queries promptly and provides detailed assistance. We have not encountered major issues with their support; they have been very responsive and effective in addressing our needs.

Positive

The initial setup for AWS services is straightforward because of its user-friendly AWS Management Console. Following the manuals and documentation on the AWS website allows you to create and configure your infrastructure or deploy services easily. The graphical user interface is designed to be intuitive, and for those who prefer command-line tools, the AWS CLI and AWS CDK are also available and user-friendly. However, the vast majority of users find the AWS Management Console to be the easiest way to build and manage their infrastructure.

A basic knowledge of databases and instances is sufficient for working with Amazon Aurora. You should understand what a database and an instance are, but that's the extent of the foundational knowledge needed. To spin up and manage Amazon Aurora, you can rely on the documentation provided by AWS on their website. These resources are helpful and enough to guide you through the process.

We were using Amazon RDS, which was quite costly, especially when running larger Oracle database instances. We migrated to Amazon Aurora, which saved us nearly thirty percent in costs.

Based on your experience, having a basic understanding of databases and instances is sufficient for working with Amazon Aurora. AWS's documentation is comprehensive and helpful for spinning up and managing AuroraDB. This basic knowledge and following the guidelines should be enough to use Aurora effectively in a SaaS environment.

The main thing is that with AWS Security Hub, we can run audits in our AWS environment to identify vulnerabilities in our infrastructure and security configurations. AWS Security Hub provides a detailed report on existing vulnerabilities and their associated risk levels, such as minor, major, or high. It also offers recommendations on how to address these issues. For example, if an S3 bucket is not encrypted or secured, Security Hub will suggest ways to fix that vulnerability. These features are handy for maintaining PCI DSS compliance. For instance, if I have created an architecture for a fintech product, running a PCI DSS audit will help me identify and address any vulnerabilities. AWS allows for smooth integration with third-party tools available in the AWS Marketplace, such as Trend Micro, to enhance security further.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I use Aurora for data storage.

It works well for our needs. Amazon Aurora has supported our high-volume transactional workload.

We leverage existing AWS services, and that works fine for us.

I like that it is compatible with MySQL and the fact that it's maintained by Amazon.

Aurora's compatibility with MySQL or PostgreSQL benefited our database management. The migration from on-premise MySQL to Aurora was similar, so we didn't need to change our source code.

We rely on the fact that it's maintained by Amazon, so we don't need to install updates or patches or handle security ourselves. We don't use any specific features for availability.

There is room for improvement in pricing. 

I would like to see more AI-related features in future releases. 

I have been using it for three years. I use the latest version. 

I would rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. There are around a hundred end users using this. 

It is used daily. So, my company has daily usage. 

We use Postgres and MySQL for on-premise deployment. 

Since we're using all AWS tech, it made sense to leverage their entire product suite.

I would rate my experience with the initial setup an eight out of ten, with ten being easy. 

The deployment took us a few minutes.

The deployment was done in-house. One person was enough. 

It doesn't require any maintenance. 

I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, with ten being expensive. 

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I am using Amazon Aurora as a relational database. Our applications for our business users are usually relatively internal application types which are mostly small, which makes data storage and retrieval quick and easy, especially when developing business applications where time is of the essence. Therefore, it is preferable to have a technology that allows developers to work quickly and seamlessly, without any complicated setup or extra steps.

When we use NoSQL databases the data comes at a high speed.

The most valuable feature of Amazon Aurora is SQL standardization, it doesn't have its own syntax which is good. It has a lot of hands-off self-management type of activities, such as log rolling and auto-scaling.

There is improvement needed to have more developer focus. Additionally, it would be helpful to have a stand-alone solution outside of Amazon. Amazon has a tendency to favor developing web-based clients, which may not always provide the fastest or most responsive solution as desired.

I have used Amazon Aurora within 12 months.

Amazon Aurora is stable, I have not had an issue with the solution.

The solution is highly scalable, this is the main reason we use it.

There is not any support for the solution. It is self-documenting and self-aware. They provide you with the tool to fix it yourself whenever there is an issue.

The initial setup of Amazon Aurora is one of the better experiences that I have had.

My advice to others who want to use this solution should go through the AWS foundation courses.

I rate Amazon Aurora an eight out of ten.

We had challenges in loading huge volumes of data quickly, with reports growing beyond a certain number of millions of rows. Despite indexing and applying filters, we experienced significant latency loading the related reports. That's why we looked into using Aurora. We monitored it for about six months and tweaked the database-related parameters, but we still didn't see much improvement. So we reverted to RDS.

We had better control over the parameters that we could tweak in terms of intermediate storage and better indexing capabilities.

It would have been helpful if they had provided some benchmarking numbers. If they had given those, we would have been able to make a more informed decision.

I have been using Amazon Aurora for six months. 

It is a stable solution for a specific business case.

It is a scalable solution. We had around 35 users.

My IT person has been involved in the setup, but they said it was easy.

It is an expensive solution. It is one of the reasons we shifted to RDS. 

I would check you to check your use cases and the pain points you have with the current database and then recommend you make a benchmarking comparison. 

In case of any specific requirements, we can evaluate if Amazon Aurora is a good fit. Overall, I would rate the solution a seven out of ten because our objective was not fulfilled.