Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Amazon Aurora vs CockroachDB comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon Aurora
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
9th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
CockroachDB
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Relational Databases Tools category, the mindshare of Amazon Aurora is 3.4%, down from 4.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of CockroachDB is 3.5%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Relational Databases Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Rajitha Jatothu - PeerSpot reviewer
Achieve high performance with fault-tolerant and highly available database management
Aurora is a key pillar for us, offering performance and availability. It is faster than RDS and supports multi-region clusters and scalability. One feature we value is Aurora's ability to provide a reader endpoint, allowing applications to connect without tracking replicas. It supports auto-scaling and offers several options for monitoring and optimizing database performance. Aurora's fault tolerance and ability to handle multiple replicas contribute to its reliability and high performance.
Antonio Tringali - PeerSpot reviewer
Open source with extensive documentation and a University for training
I am a freelancer. A client of mine wanted a solution that would allow them to scale yet not abandon the familiar PostgreSQL front-end (and rewrite a part of their source code). Scalability aside, CockroachDB is a fine way forward from PostgreSQL and is not changing the client source code part of the system. If you are lucky and you do not use newer features from recent versions of PostgreSQL or PostgreSQL extensions, it's fine. There are nice-to-have features for big organizations like regional tables. At the moment, my client simply does not use these. However, the serverless offer from CockroachDB is reacting well as data grows.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"We had better control over the parameters that we could tweak in terms of intermediate storage and better indexing capabilities."
"Aurora's features that I find the most beneficial include its database backup strategy, performance options, and input-output operations."
"The most valuable feature is that the maintainability is offloaded to the service provider. I don't have to maintain a database or do any administrative tasks, which comes in handy."
"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."
"Aurora is a key pillar for us, offering performance and availability."
"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."
"The solution’s scalability is good since we don’t need to take a maintenance window during unpredictable workloads. I like the solution’s behind-the-scenes happenings. It is a great feature."
"The most valuable features of Amazon Aurora include the global instance with the global writer endpoint, which allows failovers and instance switches without requiring changes in my code, thanks to the default global Route 53 endpoint."
"The tool's most valuable feature is node syncing, which takes only 0.54 milliseconds."
"The initial setup and deployment are simple."
"The most valuable feature is that CockroachDB is a distributed database, which can deploy nodes running in different regions."
"CockroachDB is highly reliable."
"The product has valuable security features."
"The availability and the easy to use feature is the most valuable. The documentation is also good."
"What I like best is its ability to solve data residency issues. The main advantage is auto geo partitioning, built into the product. This means we don't have to spin up separate servers in each region, which would be much more costly."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its resiliency features and the geo-partitioning capabilities."
 

Cons

"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."
"It is a bit costly. The features are quite good, and I wouldn't say it requires any technical improvements. But from a cost perspective, some clients wouldn't go for Aurora because of that."
"I would like to see performance insights on the database based on the queries. Currently, we use SolarWinds as the monitoring tool. I would like to leverage SolarWinds’ performance insights in AWS services. SolarWinds gives larger insights when we run performance issues."
"In Oracle, tools like Veridata allow for comparing databases and certifying data accuracy, even offering repair capabilities, which are missing in Aurora. There should be a similar comparison tool in Aurora."
"While Amazon Aurora meets your current scaling and storage needs, there is room for improvement in cryptography and scalability compared to other databases."
"One of the most valuable features is storage scaling."
"The pricing could improve. It should be reduced."
"It would have been helpful if they had provided some benchmarking numbers."
"CockroachDB needs to improve store processes."
"I would like CockroachDB to have more compatibility with PostgreSQL, especially with the connection string and technical integrations."
"The platform could be more extensible."
"We are looking for more features to support distributed high availability and geo-partitioning."
"I think the engine itself could be improved. If you miss a partition key, it should be able to be modeled. This is where AI could be really helpful. For example, if a user is from Australia, the system should know to look for their data there first instead of searching in the US or another continent."
"I find the serverless offer a bit confusing."
"The closer they can make CockroachDB to being completely compatible with Postgres, the better. It's almost compatible, but not completely. If it was, it would be nice to just be able to use Postgres libraries without any fiddling."
"Cockroach does not support all types of protocols. I need to improve it myself to support a CouchDB on my network."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is an expensive solution."
"The tool’s pricing depends on the instance type. For cost optimization purposes, we use the result instance category."
"There is no need to buy a license for the product. We can pay as per the use case."
"It is quite expensive."
"I would rate the pricing a six out of ten, with ten being expensive."
"The price could be lower compared to its competitors."
"The platform is affordable even for the enterprise version. It provides value for investment in terms of performance."
"I've used CockroachDB at a small scale on the free accounts because we are only testing."
"The solution's pricing is not cheap. However, the good thing is that customers are willing to pay for it if they want it."
"The product's price depends on the user's company and the contract model they enter into with CockroachDB. Depending on the contract model one enters into with CockroachDB, the product may or may not be expensive."
"The pricing is good but can be made cheaper. I would rate the pricing a five out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Relational Databases Tools solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
27%
Computer Software Company
15%
Government
6%
Manufacturing Company
5%
Financial Services Firm
39%
Computer Software Company
13%
Retailer
5%
University
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Amazon Aurora?
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.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon Aurora?
AWS is costlier than self-managed solutions, but this includes the managed service experience. Their pricing is fair and reflects the managed service and additional features AWS offers.
What needs improvement with Amazon Aurora?
AWS RDS doesn't provide an option to apply one-off patches, which can be critical for business due to unexpected product bugs. While self-managed systems allow immediate patch application, RDS has ...
What do you like most about CockroachDB?
The subset of SQL that my client is using is completely supported.
What needs improvement with CockroachDB?
I would like CockroachDB to have more compatibility with PostgreSQL, especially with the connection string and technical integrations.
What is your primary use case for CockroachDB?
I am studying how to deploy CockroachDB and YugaByteDB, and learning some basic information about them. I am testing these databases as part of my school application to find a suitable database for...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Dow Jones, Arizona State University, Verizon, Capital One, United Nations, Nielsen, Autodesk, Fanduel
Baidu, Kindred, Tierion, Heroic Labs, Gorgias
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Aurora vs. CockroachDB and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.