What is our primary use case?
Think of Neo4j AuraDB as a special type of database - it's a graph database. Graph databases can be used for situations where you want to do relationship-centric modeling. If you want to identify how data points are related to each other, that's where AuraDB does really well.
Specifically, in terms of RAG and generative AI use cases, where you want to find out how close data points are to each other, AuraDB does really well. It's fast because the data is essentially a graph database with points linked to each other.
It feels like a perfect solution if your use cases involve identifying or working with relationships within the data.
How has it helped my organization?
Think of AuraDB as a database. For example, imagine you have textual data in the form of documents, and you want to feed that data into an existing LLM model to gain extra context. That's where you would use AuraDB.
In this use case, you would convert your textual corpus into a graph database and store it in AuraDB. This can then be fed into an existing or newly created LLM model, which will provide better insights. You can then perform analysis on your data, and your LLMs can answer questions and provide better context based on the additional data you've provided.
This is essentially RAG workflow, but it's really useful for storing extra data or storing your data efficiently.
AuraDB effectively manages complex data relationships. If there is an inherent need within your data or your use case to identify how the data is related to each other and how the individual points are related to each other, then the graph structure of the database itself is the biggest feature AuraDB provides.
It also has a query language called Cypher, which is used to query within the database, create the database, and get your use cases out.
So the key features or the key pointers are the Cypher query language, its speed, and the inherent graph structure of the database.
What is most valuable?
The most beneficial things in terms of AuraDB are its speed, its good pricing, the multi-cloud availability, and its availability across GCP, Azure, and Amazon. It's great for use cases where you want to do relationship-centric modeling. So, those are the most valuable things in AuraDB.
I also work with real-time data in the AuraDB solution. A lot of this, especially the scalability and how efficient these conversations are, depends on what model or writing strategy you go for. But you can definitely work with real-time data.
For my personal projects, I use AI. What we're seeing right now can work very well with RAGs in AuraDB or any graph database. So we take extra data, put it in a graph database—AuraDB in this case—and feed it to an existing large language or a small language model. With that, an AI model can gain some extra understanding of your data, which is stored in a graph database.
It can give out very contextual and specific answers based on the extra data users provide in the form of a graph database, which is stored in AuraDB. So the use cases are, from what I mean, the terminology is graph RAG, but that's where I see a lot of potential use cases for a lot of data.
The outcome accuracy with the AI-enhanced graph is good for my use cases. However, it may be difficult to assign a numerical accuracy metric to Neo4j. But for example, with text summarization, you cannot put a number to the accuracy. However, just seeing the answers and the improvements in the model, it's definitely helpful in improving the results. It's essentially giving an extra context to your model. So, I definitely see the advantages of using AuraDB.
What needs improvement?
I've been using it for a few months now, and everything has been fairly positive. Maybe in terms of documentation, they can improve a little bit.
Neo4j AuraDB already has a good set of documentation, and the initial setup is easy, but it could be made a bit easier. For me, things are going very well, actually.
In terms of AuraDB, the conversations have always been around scalability. So that's where people are majorly concerned: whether it can be used for truly production-grade projects. But Neo4j AuraDB consistently comes up with updates. But potentially, that could be one area where maybe I can see some more improvements.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been working with AuraDB for around six months now. It's mostly been an experimental thing where I try out projects and find use cases to see its maximum potential.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
I do find it stable. There are some competitors out there, but in terms of the learning curve, it's very easy. The initial setup is very easy. So, it's definitely a stable solution.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Five years back, scalability was considered a bit of an issue with respect to AuraDB. But I think with the recent updates, they've handled it very well.
Currently, I'm using AuraDB just for experimental purposes, so from what I've read and what I've seen about AuraDB, it can handle quite a vast amount of data.
There may be some performance issues when your database or your data is very large, but then again, it's completely dependent on what pricing strategy you go for.
From my side, right now, it has been mostly experimental and working on personal projects. So, again, it's dependent on what project I've seen. But it can also be used for large-scale projects. That's where I see conversations where people are a little bit concerned, wherein very large use cases, where billions of data points are there, whether it would be as efficient. It would work, but maybe it might take a hit in terms of speed, even the efficiency of it.
How are customer service and support?
As of now, I have not reached out to them as such because everything has been fairly clear to me. But I'm fairly sure that the technical support is good.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I have not worked with other graph databases, but I am aware of the competitors. There is TigerGraph database, and I think Amazon Neptune, and one from Azure as well. I've not really worked them out, so I use AuraDB.
I found the initial setup fairly straightforward. From what I felt, the learning curve was a bit simpler. AuraDB had their courses out there, and some of them are out there for free, so you can just quickly learn them. And I just felt that the initial setup was much simpler compared to others, and I was able to catch on to it.
How was the initial setup?
The deployment is just a standard way—it's like any other database. There's no difference in the way AuraDB does things.
AuraDB can be hosted or is available in the major cloud services. So, the deployment procedure remains pretty standard compared to the other existing databases out there. There's no difference as such.
We use the public cloud, so that's where the deployment is being worked out.
The deployment time depends, again, on the project and the circumstances. But, the initial learning, it might take two to three months to pick it up. And working on a project, again, maybe another three, four months. And in terms of deployment, another one, two months to it. But, again, it's purely dependent on the project and the circumstances.
From what I have seen, there's no real maintenance or anything extra to it. It's just that since it's a new technology, or rather, not many people might be aware of it, it's just the awareness needs to be there, but there's no additional maintenance as such.
What about the implementation team?
I have done the deployment myself. There has been no real assistance, at least until now. But I think their community support is fairly nice, so that's something to look out for as well.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
The product offers three pricing strategies.
One is the free version of AuraDB, which can be used for small and experimental projects, which is what I'm doing.
Then there is AuraDB Professional, which is $65 a month.
And then there is AuraDB Enterprise, which is for the production of large-scale use cases, and that's where they give more security and support.
So those are the pricing strategies.
I use the free version as well.
What other advice do I have?
I would definitely recommend AuraDB to others. Give it a shot to see whether it fits your use case, and I would definitely recommend it.
So, for my current usage, I would give AuraDB a nine out of ten. I think it's fairly good. Again, the small improvements might be in terms of the scalability and a little bit more documentation, but a fairly solid nine out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Public Cloud