AWS MySQL Aurora Vs RDS - What one should I chose?

AWS MySQL Aurora Vs RDS - What one should I chose?

Johnny Chivers

2 года назад

16,212 Просмотров

Ссылки и html тэги не поддерживаются


Комментарии:

Sean M
Sean M - 14.06.2023 20:47

Now I'm more confused. I thought they did completely different things. I thought Aurora was compatible with RDS. But you're saying they're alternatives to one another? I don't understand the function of each service.

Ответить
Kieran Desmond
Kieran Desmond - 17.05.2023 11:45

Excellent video. What is the connectivity in Aurora like with Redshift vs RDS?

Ответить
Talamel
Talamel - 08.05.2023 06:11

Nicely done, easy to understand, well laid out, very articulate. Thank you!

Ответить
Andres Felipe Franco
Andres Felipe Franco - 17.04.2023 20:02

bro!! Thanks for you time, it's cool you video.

Ответить
Xaero324
Xaero324 - 22.02.2023 22:28

Interesting your price estimator in this video says Aurora will be cheaper. Almost every other video I've seen states that the cost is higher than using non Aurora version.

Ответить
Paul V
Paul V - 21.02.2023 16:09

Just came across your vid, great explanation man, thanks a lot!

Ответить
sgblaxican
sgblaxican - 30.08.2022 04:50

Bless you. This is the easiest to follow comparison video for rds mysql vs. aurora that i've seen!

Ответить
Grant Peace
Grant Peace - 07.07.2022 11:38

You're a boss.
Perfect delivery of two services that sit side-by-side.
I've recently built my architecture on AWS RDS and am now switching to Aurora.
Liked and Subscribed.
Thanks.

Ответить
Ta Ab
Ta Ab - 17.02.2022 23:57

INOA Aurora Global Databases came out in 2018

Ответить
Stanislaus Tebid
Stanislaus Tebid - 13.02.2022 16:33

Good job with this video. Please give more screen time to the slides. We already see your handsome face.😜 It was shit hard to grab concepts from the slide since you switch abit too fast

Ответить
Cantimploro Manolencio
Cantimploro Manolencio - 20.01.2022 01:10

When talking about prices you are comparing a multi-az MySQL with a single-az Aurora, is that fair? Aurora replicates the storage layer across all AZ, but not the server instance; in the other side, MySQL multi-az means you have a replica of the server running in other AZ. In that scenario MySQL has HA, but Aurora doesn't. To achieve HA with Aurora you need to configure a replica in other AZ, so the price will be the double (340.50 USD). In case of failover the replica is promoted as primary, but it also implies a change in the endpoint; to avoid it you also need to configure a RDS Proxy that costs another 43.20 USD for that configuration (primary and replica with 2 vcpus each). So, in total, to achieve HA in Aurora, you have to pay 383.70 USD/month (70.14 USD more expensive than MySQL configuration).

Ответить
Andy Nelson
Andy Nelson - 14.01.2022 02:11

Cost savings definitely make it attractive 🙂

Ответить