Amazon RDS Reviews

We primarily use the solution for internal systems and the database.

The performance has been fine. We have no complaints in regard to the speed.

It is very easy to set up initially.

It is stable and reliable.

I do not have complaints about RDS.

The solution tends to have a lot of updates. It's a very short time before we need to update again.

Technical support could be better.

They should make it cheaper for the users. 

I've been using the solution for ten years. I've used it for quite a long time. It's been a decade or so. 

The solution is very stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It doesn't break down.

The support is not so good. We did choose the support level that was a little cheaper, and we don't find them to be that helpful or responsive. 

The setup process is simple and straightforward. It is not overly complex. 

It only takes about ten to 20 minutes to deploy the product. It's very fast.

I have found the price to be a little bit too expensive. 

We're an Amazon partner.

I'm not sure which version of the solution I am using. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I use this solution because I am trying to develop a fintech application.

It takes off a load in setting up the VM, infrastructure, software and user accounts that go with databases.

I appreciate how Amazon RDS allows me to choose the kind of database I want. The IT is easy to set up, which is the best. It makes it easy to deploy quickly. I initially tried setting up a database on a local machine and realized that several requirements were needed. I needed to do a lot of infrastructure management.

Sometimes the interface has many moving parts, which is a concern. For example, the cloud is a virtual network instead of having a dedicated VPC that handles databases, and they have it connected to the VPC that handles the main Amazon infrastructure.

If I had one that was indicated, it would make things easier because there are specific things I need when connecting to ensure accessibility. There is no need for multiple settings, considering a database cannot survive independently. Amazon RDS needs a connection to be a client, so they should tune it a bit more. In addition, uploading and having it done within a short period is challenging.

I have used this solution for the past seven months, and we use the latest version. It is deployed on the cloud, public AWS.

It has good availability, and so far, we haven't had any issues with it.

We haven't reached the point where we need to scale up for performance or storage. But I don't think manually scaling the discs is easy to do, so it should be able to scale on its own. In addition, the instances can manage the traffic, and there's an option for setting each total scale. So depending on how production goes, we may scale it. We have three people using the solution, including myself. So we need only one person to maintain.

We haven't contacted technical support because we haven't encountered any issues.

I completed the deployment myself. We're using local databases on a local host to test and deploy it.

We do not have any return on investment because we are still testing.

I do not have specific details about the pricing, but we use the solution on demand. I rate the pricing a six out of ten, with one being the most expensive and ten being the cheapest. We have to pay extra for monitoring services.

I rate this solution a seven out of ten. Regarding advice, learning from other good consoles and having the basics before approaching them is essential.

Amazon RDS is custom development. 

Some databases that we would like to use are lightweight and simple to integrate with the application.

Amazon RDS is lightweight and flexible.

It's a secure solution.

The security features could be improved.

I have been working with Amazon RDS for three years.

It is part of the cloud migration solution.

Amazon RDS is quite stable.

Amazon RDS is a scalable solution.

RDS is a single instance. However, the actual users are approximately 500 people, both direct and indirect.

We have stopped using it.

I have not contacted technical support.

In the past, I used Amazon SimpleDB, Amazon EMR, and Amazon Redshift, but I no longer use them.

The initial setup is satisfactory.

It took two weeks to complete the installation.

We have three engineers, one lead, and one manager to maintain this solution.

With the help of our in-house staff, we completed the installation on our own.

Licensing fees are paid on an annual basis.

I would rate Amazon RDS a ten out of ten because it is lightweight, and the flexibility.

We are using AWS RDS to have a database that we're not using at the moment. I'm not making any changes to the parameter of the database or the configuration of the database on AWS. I just have to open a new port on the map of the network to have a connection to the prepaid network.

The initial setup is straightforward, and technical support is good.

The price could be better. We have better options like Microsoft Azure to use in the cloud. I also don't think it's very scalable. 

I've been using Amazon RDS for almost five months.

I don't think it's very scalable. In comparison, Microsoft Azure has many options. In RDS, I couldn't even find many options to increase or to perform a scale up or scale down.

Technical support is good.

The initial setup is straightforward because our data isn't difficult to manage. But there are a few things that take some time or become hard to manage because we have many security and network configurations. I need to rush through the connection between my machine and the cloud to bypass our prepaid network, and that makes things a little bit harder. But it's not too complicated.

At the time, we needed to deploy by ourselves, manually. I think it took just one or two of us to implement and maintain this solution.

The price could be better.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Amazon RDS a seven.

The benefits I experienced while using Amazon RDS stemmed from the fact that it provided me with the database and helped with managing searches in AWS. With Amazon RDS, you have your database without worrying about infrastructure, updates, or other things.

The shortcomings stem from not Amazon RDS as a product but are related to its monitoring capabilities. I feel Amazon RDS should have a lot of functionalities to make monitoring within the database easier. Amazon RDS should provide more granularity of log entries.

I have had a few years of experience with Amazon RDS. I was a user of the solution.

I found it to be a stable solution.

I never needed the solution's technical support.

Amazon RDS was the first tool with which I used databases or services on the cloud.

Currently, I work with Microsoft Azure SQL Database in my new company.

Speaking about Microsoft Azure SQL Database, you would always have the latest version and latest update since Microsoft is the owner of the Microsoft Stack.

Amazon RDS is easy to deploy and integrate, but it depends on the solution. Maybe if you need to restore your database in a different region or in a different account or want to run Amazon RDS databases in multi-account environments, then it can be really hard and painful.

Amazon RDS is an expensive solution.

I would tell those who plan to use Amazon RDS to understand how it works and determine the pricing part before purchasing it since it is expensive.

The ease of using Amazon RDS depends on your platform, design, and software. Amazon RDS is easy to use if you have an AWS infrastructure.

With Amazon RDS, integrations with third-party solutions can be easy and beneficial for the product's monitoring part only. In general, integrating Amazon RDS with third-party solutions can be a complex process.

I rate the overall product an eight and a half out of ten.

I use Amazon RDS for my access control system, which manages permissions for users to enter places like universities, workspaces, and club team areas. Amazon RDS stores user data and keeps access permissions current, ensuring the system is reliable and responsive for user security and convenience.

The most valuable features of Amazon RDS are its scalability, reliability, and intelligence.

The only thing that needs improvement would be the pricing of the solution. Otherwise, it works very well as it is.

I have been using Amazon RDS for three years.

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. I haven't had any issues with it so far.

Scalability is one of Amazon RDS's strongest points. I would rate it a nine out of ten.

In 2019, we had a paid subscription for AWS technical support, not specifically for Amazon RDS. We reached out to them when we were conducting stress testing on our system and noticed a significant performance drop, but we couldn't identify the cause. AWS support was helpful. They opened a ticket, communicated with us, and worked with us to pinpoint the problem. Eventually, they helped us resolve the issue, which was valuable for our project.

I have previously used another DBaaS solution apart from AWS, which was Google Cloud Platform (GCP). In GCP, we used a PostgreSQL database. One standout feature of GCP that I appreciated was its robust monitoring tools, which were helpful for analyzing performance and identifying issues. While I can't speak in depth about AWS's monitoring capabilities, based on my experience, GCP's tools were quite beneficial in this regard.

Setting up Amazon RDS is quite simple. First, you create an instance by specifying details like its name, storage preferences, and security settings. You can also choose to set up backups. After clicking "create," your RDS instance is ready within minutes. You receive connection parameters, which you use in your application to connect to the database. From there, you can start creating tables and storing data. It's a straightforward process that doesn't require much technical complexity. The deployment of Amazon RDS instance was very quick configuration took only a few minutes. It is an easy and cost-effective process, with a setup fee of around $31. Getting the connection parameters and establishing the connection to the database was seamless and efficient. Overall, it was a smooth and positive experience. 
Amazon RDS requires some maintenance, but it is not complicated. You might need to update the database configuration from time to time, which can be done by modifying your RDS instance. You can also schedule regular backups and updates provided by AWS. These changes can be controlled by you, so it is an organized process that ensures your database stays in good shape without much hassle. We have approximately 10,000 users of the solution at our company.

Amazon RDS is quite expensive.

My advice for those starting with AWS products is to closely monitor your usage and expenses. With on-demand and pay-as-you-go services, it is easy to keep using resources without realizing the costs adding up. So, keep a close eye on your bills to control expenses, as pricing might seem small but can accumulate quickly. This is important for cost management in general, and it applies to AWS services too. Overall, I would rate Amazon RDS a nine out of ten.

Whatever is to be stored, for example, any database requirements, you can use RDS, unless you need to scale it to quite a large size, RDS could be a good solution. You can still go beyond RDS, however, basically for small to medium-sized database requirements, you can always reliably use RDS as a database solution.

The first thing I like about RDS is the on-prem implementation. The time to install or set up a database environment is very fast.

The resilience, multi-zone resilience, and availability are great. We don't need to extensively create any replication services or anything that we have to worry about as DBAs. Everything is given. It's just a matter of punching in the parameters and in the background, it all that is configured. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

It's scalable.

The solution is reliable and stable. 

If you are a very tech-savvy guy who is a DBA, there are certain limitations due to how it's been implemented. You cannot do a lot of platform-level changes if that's how it's been set up, however, it's not required actually. Those limitations have not stopped anything, not stopped us from doing anything. That said, someone more technical may not like the limitations. Platform-level changes are not allowed. 

The solution is a bit expensive. 

I've been dealing with the solution for the last eight months. 

I haven't experienced any stability and can therefore say it's reliable and the performance is good. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

I've found the solution to be scalable. 

I have worked with only three clients at the moment with RDS.

Technical support has been very good. 

The implementation process is straightforward. The instructions are very clear. Even a person with basic knowledge would be able to spin up an RDS without an issue. It's not very complicated. The parameters are simple. You can read and understand everything very easily and know what questions to ask and what parameters to consider.

One staff member is more than enough for deployment and maintenance. 

You don't need a separate staff for the RDS management. A regular person who manages the rest of the Amazon services can easily monitor it. It has a very good service called CloudWatch, Amazon CloudWatch. Through CloudWatch, everything could be monitored very, very well. All these services are auto-scale. Alerts can be automated as well. I've done this for clients. We have it configured in a way where it's very easy to maintain and manage. We don't need to continuously monitor or anything. We have set thresholds and that CloudWatch service actually helps us to do the monitoring part automatically.

Across most of the database services, it had been a little expensive. It's not only Amazon. If you look at other cloud solution providers, they have to reconsider bringing the prices down. Some clients might not be able to reap their ROI the way that the pricing has been structured for RDS services. It was quite expensive.

I'm an implementer.

I'd recommend the solution. It would be perfect for whoever starts a small or medium business. This is the go-to database they should consider.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

We deployed RDS in our environment, and our use case is so simple. We don't have large-scale use, but we will start using RDS with more users. For now, we deployed it, and we use RDS with only a few users.

For me, RDS is a great solution. I like that Amazon RDS is a very simple solution to implement and to start using.

It would be better if it integrated seamlessly with Microsoft products. Our clients use the Microsoft Tally application server. We already tried to create a reputation, for example, an on-premises environment from our client to Amazon RDS using the Microsoft Tally server. But we couldn't do that because we didn't have a strong user in RDS. We couldn't create a reputation from an on-premises environment from the Microsoft Tally server to RDS. I think that it would be a good implementation, and it would help us with this case.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Amazon RDS a ten.