Amazon RDS Reviews

When I was working for at my previous organization, we wanted to bring stability to all our MySQL databases. As a DBA, at first, it was scary as I thought I would be out of a job, however, the RDS managed DB allowed me to focus more on optimization and less on administration. (both hardware and software). 

When I was working at another organization we had a large amount of MySQL on-prem to manage. It required lots of time to set them up, monitoring, and maintain them. RDS really allowed us to remove all the painful administration parts. 

Less time was spent maintaining MySQL. Having to configure each server and spinning up a new MySQL in RDS takes 10 to 15min. It's a huge time-saving in maintenance. 

By using RDS, AWS takes care of the maintenance of the hardware and software updates. Being able to scale quickly or downsize with no impact is also great.

All of your databases are nicely organized under 1 interface; you have quick access to some monitors and Cloudwatch can be used to set up alerts based on thresholds and notify you. 

Today, with Terraform, you can automate the full process of creating RDS servers, deprecating them, changing their size, adding a replica, etc.

Create Replicas. Being able to create a replica with just a few clicks is great. Setting replication before would require backup, restore, and synching replication. 

Backups. The fact that you can take a snapshot of the database without impacting the server is great. In comparison, large backups could lock tables or take too long. Alternatively, you would have to use tools such as xtraDB backup. That requires lots of code and maintenance.

Change Size. Being able to change the size of an RDS MySQL instance is amazing. There's no need to provision new machines, setup replication, etc. It's all done for you.

The solution needs RDS Mysql support for both MySQL 8 and MariaDB. 

The Performance Monitor they have is a little clanky, at least in regards to the UI. 

I wish they had designed a better MySQL Monitoring solution. I personally like SolarWinds DPA.

The performance is not always as good as MySQL running on its own EC2 instance. I have done some benchmarks before between EC2 instances and RDS and EC2 were better.

Being unable to select Out-file is annoying. They do support select Out-files into S3 but only on Aurora. It would be nice if they had implemented that feature in RDS MySQL.

I've been using AWS RDS for more than 8 years. 

MySQL RDS is very stable. I cannot say that running MySQL on-premise or on EC2 instances is less stable than RDS MySQL. However, when there are hardware issues, if you have RDS MySQL standby "on", you'll appreciate the fail-over solution. 

MySQL RDS can scale very well. I have been using it in critical Production services.

AWS Customer Support is pretty good. Their response time is usually adequate. They offer different support options and provide different support media (for example, phone, web, and email).

I was using MySQL on-prem. I decided to switch due to the amount of time required to maintain on-premises databases.

The initial setup is fairly straightforward. There is some tuning that needs to be done with RDS. The default settings are not always adequate.

We handled the implementation in-house.

Make sure you provision your MySQL RDS properly. Don't over or under-provision. 

Perform some benchmarks before migrating. Migrating to a new system is costly. You don't want to have your data migrated only to realize it performs much worse than before.

I did not evaluate other options. I did evaluate Aurora, however, for the project requirements, it was not needed.

RDS MySQL (and Postgres) are great managed database services. AWS provides a large range of database instance sizes from micro to very large machines. RDS can scale, and creating Replicas is very easy to accomplish. 

If you're unsure if you should start using RDS or not, I suggest you consult with a MySQL RDS DBA or Data Architect who has used RDS for several years before making a decision.

We have a lot of benefits moving to managed services, including Amazon RDS. It is a great service, and we have a lot of cases needing Amazon RDS. So, it is a great product.

We have some cases where our customers are looking for more performance or simplifying their DR. So, in this way, we have some cases where the customers moved from EC2 using enterprise license to Amazon RDS with less cost or with included standardization. So, we have cases of moving from EC2 to RDS to simplify the management and also simplify the DR strategy.

The most valuable feature is how simple it is to implement the solution's multiple phases, and also and also have the DR strategy on Amazon. For me, I think it is a great feature how simple it is to increase the performance of instances running on Amazon RDS.

For me, I think that it will be great to have the option to have more SQL or have a deployment allowing for configuring it with a Microsoft SQL server.

Currently, speaking of Microsoft SQL on RDS, you don't have a full option to be able to use it directly on RDS. So, it needs improvement. It will be good to have more solutions with a simple deployment. So being in one region, you should have the option to deploy the solution in another region.

I have been using Amazon RDS for three years. Also, I am using the solution's latest version.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

I haven't used the support, but as a partner, I rate the support a ten out of ten since we have a lot of technicians, like solution architects and so on. So the support is great. And we also have feedback from the customers regarding the tech support manager and the support they received. So, overall it is great.

Positive

The initial deployment of RDS was straightforward since our teams have experience.

I have seen a return on investment using the solution.

The pricing of RDS is a little bit high compared to Microsoft. But we know that it is related to Microsoft licenses. However, it is a good price compared to other solutions.

I would recommend the solution to others. I rate the overall solution a ten out of ten.

I use the solution to store the data of the applications we run on AWS Lambda.

The solution is scalable and can be configured with AWS Secrets Manager. So our password is secure. Also, due to Amazon RDS Multi-AZ, other nodes are available for us if we face a problem in a particular zone. This functionality makes the solution resilient.

If we do not keep track of our costs, we might face some problems.

I have been using the solution for more than three years.

The solution is quite stable. We haven't seen any issues in the last three years. Since we are using Amazon RDS Multi-AZ, other nodes are available on the machine, even if the solution is down. I rate the stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the scalability a seven out of ten. Multiple teams in our organization are using the solution.

We get a timely response from the support team when we raise issues.

The initial setup is quite easy. If we know the configuration, we can run the system, and our database will be ready in 10 to 15 minutes.

If we use the product wisely, we can optimize the cost. The cost depends on the kind of instance we use.

The solution helps us to provide a serverless database. There are multiple servers available in case someone has a high workload. We must understand whether our application is a read-heavy application or a write-heavy application. Accordingly, we must choose the right instance. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Amazon RDS helps with information regarding the customer's business performance.

The solution has helped us have valuable metrics on our customer's business.

The most valuable feature of Amazon RDS is its performance.

The solution could improve the administration tools.

I have been using Amazon RDS for approximately three years.

The stability of Amazon RDS is good.

We do not have plans to increase the usage of the solution.

I have not used the support from the vendor.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We have seen an ROI using the solution.

Amazon RDS is less expensive than other solutions.

I rate Amazon RDS a nine out of ten.

We use the solution to migrate products from on-premises to AWS environment.

The solution's most valuable feature is the provisioning of products. We don't have to worry about storage approval or hardware availability using this feature. It is the most accessible feature in RDS.

They should add a feature for manual SQL patching in RDS. Also, the auto-patching features have their limitations. We can't set a particular day or date of the month for auto-maintenance.

We have been using the solution for two years.

I have never come across any issues regarding the solution's stability. The database uptime works fine.

Scalability is one of the solution's best features.

The solution's customer service is excellent.

Positive

The solution's initial setup is straightforward.

The solution's pricing needs improvement. I rate it as a six.

If they have to segregate the databases into different RDS databases, it will cost almost the same or even more than any on-premises migration.

I rate the solution as an eight because it quickly provisions the resources. It covers all the security and governance parameters as well.

Amazon RDS is used for SQL Databases.

The most valuable aspect of Amazon RDS is it is on the cloud.

Amazon RDS could improve by having more sophisticated. I use other solutions that have better technology for more difficult tasks.

I have been using Amazon RDS for approximately two years.

The version of Amazon RDS depends on the database being used.

The stability of the solution depends on the RDS being used. For example, Aurora is not stable but Postgres is. The stability could improve.

I rate the scalability of Amazon RDS a six out of ten.

The level or quality of support depends on how much you are paying for support. If you are paying for premium support then it will be better than the standard support offering.

The initial setup of Amazon RDS is simple. The deployment is quick because of automation. It can be done in less than 10 minutes.

The solution does not require human intervention for deployment. You can simply load it into the pipeline and the pipeline will deploy it automatically.

I rate the initial setup of Amazon RDS a ten out of ten.

Amazon RDS could improve by reducing the price.

I rate the price of Amazon RDS an eight out of ten.

We have a few engineers doing the maintenance of the solution. They maintain the standardized code that everyone uses.

My advice to others is for them to use a different solution, such as Aurora, DynamoDB, or MongoDB. Amazon RDS is only used if the user wants to use a legacy-type application.

This is a well-established solution.

I rate Amazon RDS a seven out of ten.

We use Amazon RDS for our Oracle Learning system. About five clients or so use it for that. We also offer a database service using Oracle, Amazon RDS, and Microsoft SQL Server RDS for our rental clients. 

Amazon RDS is good for backups, auto-scanning, and disaster recovery. It's also appropriate for the office server. 

An RDS account cannot be shared when you close it. You need an encryption key to clone the data, but you cannot share it. 

I have used Amazon RDS for more than seven years.

The stability is good.

Scalability is an issue. It doesn't handle large data sets well, so we use a different solution for those. This is a limitation of RDBMs, and data doubles every two years. 

AWS support is decent, but it's not as good as before. Sometimes, we get junior staff who are unable to answer our questions. It also depends on the support team you get. Support based in Europe and Australia is better than US support. For example, European support is quick to deliver the right answer. US support handles routine maintenance issues, and it's mostly junior staff who don't know the product well. 

We use multiple solutions from various vendors. It's better to compare Amazon RDS to AWS Aura and MySQL. You pay more with Aura, and it cannot handle our scheduled databases.

I rate Amazon RDS nine out of 10 for ease of setup.

I rate Amazon RDS eight out of 10 overall. 

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.

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.

It's very useful to save customer's data in a secure manner, we can easily handle all the customer records with encryption mode.

Currently, we are not using RDS as, it has some limitations on DB schema creation, it allows limited tenant DB creations...expecting to release RDS custom RDS very soon

It is stable, scalable, and easy to deploy.

Expecting to have AWS RDS custom.

I have been using this solution for almost four years.

It is stable.

It is scalable. We have more than 12,000 users who are using this solution.

When we depend on the AWS technical team, we need to pay more. For tech support, they are charging about 25% of the actual bill, which is too high for me. If it is fixed to something like $200, I can go for that, but currently, it is too high for me.

Positive

Earlier we used Rackspace, it is very costly and more technical depedancy

It is straightforward. It takes only a couple of minutes.

We did it on our own.

Cost always depends on usage

We evaluated azure, but we faced some issues with wild card domains 

The product is pretty good, but its support is very expensive. 

I would rate it a ten out of ten.