Amazon Relational Database Service (Amazon RDS) is a database-as-a-service (DBaaS) from Amazon Web Services.
N/A
MariaDB Platform
Score 9.9 out of 10
N/A
MariaDB is an open-source relational database made by the original developers of MySQL, supported by the MariaDB Foundation and a community of developers. The community states recent additional capabilities as including clustering with Galera Cluster 4, compatibility with Oracle Database, and Temporal Data Tables, allowing one to query the data as it stood at any point in the past.
N/A
Pricing
Amazon Relational Database Service (RDS)
MariaDB Platform
Editions & Modules
Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL
$0.24 ($0.48)
per hour, R5 Large (R5 Extra Large)
Amazon RDS for MariaDB
$0.25 ($0.50)
per hour, R5 Large (R5 Extra Large)
Amazon RDS for MySQL
$0.29 ($0.58)
per hour, R5 Large (R5 Extra Large)
Amazon RDS for Oracle
$0.482 ($0.964)
per hour, R5 Large (R5 Extra Large)
Amazon RDS for SQL Server
$1.02 ($1.52)
per hour, R5 Large (R5 Extra Large)
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Amazon RDS
MariaDB Platform
Free Trial
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
Optional
Optional
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Amazon Relational Database Service (RDS)
MariaDB Platform
Considered Both Products
Amazon RDS
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Amazon RDS
AWS RDS supports many engines and is more efficient than just MySQL.
It was based on previous experience and a few things that are good about AWS, like S3 and Lambda, the ease of integrating AWS's in-house services, and, of course, support. So, our organization has decided to use AWS.
The AWS relational database service was selected because at the early stages of the implementation of the company product the team didn't have a lot of experience in creating and configuring database inside the company cluster, but there was a need to have a relation database, …
Amazon Relational Database Service (RDS) stands out among similar products due to its seamless integration with other AWS services, automated backups, and multi-AZ deployments for high availability. Its support for various database engines, such as MySQL, PostgreSQL, and …
In a few words, we are just to confortable working with oracle and sql server. Using RDS add another layer of distributed database in order to backup everything we have in case of a disaster and also complies with authorities locally and internacionally. All database we use, …
Deploying PostgreSQL by yourself may appear easy at first but running a production PostgreSQL cluster with millions of records is a hard task, especially for compliance, scalability, and security. RDS automates all complex tasks so you can focus on building your database schema …
With products like Google Cloud SQL, Azure SQL Database, AWS RDS stacks up quite well in all features. Features like licensing, performance, security comes to my mind the most. Another aspect is AWS's global reach.
There are a lot of factor we took into consideration the most important ones are: Ease of use and setup - Compared to other similar options Amazon RDS is very easy to setup just clicking few options and its ready for POC and for production very easy and flexible Terraform …
With the latest serverless technology Amazon Relational Database Service (RDS) has an edge over all its competitors, it works really fast with high log retention.
Amazon RDS supports a wider range of database engines, including MySQL,
PostgreSQL, Oracle, Microsoft SQL Server, and Amazon Aurora (MySQL and
PostgreSQL-compatible) than Google Cloud SQL. When compared to Google Cloud SQL, AWS provides a larger global footprint with …
Mongodb is nosql database and some clients prefer it. In our presentation we try to persuade them to use RDS with its pros and cons. The type of selection depends upon the actual need.
Although the Rackspace service is not comparable, even though it is very good, it requires a lot of administration on my part. Regarding Atlas, although it is not the same as RDS in terms of provisioning and administration panel, I mention it because I found it simpler and more …
Previously used Media Temple database hosting (now GoDaddy). While that endeavor was also successful, the AWS RDS is more secure, with higher availability and better documentation.
We have a strong preference for AWS managed services, and we find that RDS offers excellent integration with various AWS services, making it a seamless choice for our infrastructure. Furthermore, RDS supports integration with automation tools such as Terraform, enhancing our …
The main area that stuck out to me in looking at AWS RDS compared to Azure Data Lake Storage was still that RDS is simple to get up and running with over its competitors. The only negative and it holds true for both solutions is that can both be hard to estimate cost control …
During the migration from MySQL installed on Linux to AWS RDS, we were almost surprised as it was done by few clicks rather than too much configurations ans steps in case of traditional DB migrations. In no time our platform was up and running.
Installing, configuring, and managing Oracle Database can be challenging, especially for people who are new to Oracle products. Longer learning curves and higher operational overhead can be caused by this complexity. Amazon Relational Database Service is easy to understand and …
We consider initially only to have the back up product. After analysing different products, we realize that we needed a more complete and robust product such as Amazon Relational Database Service (RDS). Then, the option to hire Amazon Relational Database Service (RDS) was …
1: If your company is already deeply involved in the AWS ecosystem, such as AWS Lambda, Amazon S3, or Amazon Redshift, leveraging Amazon RDS might result in a more seamless integration of services. AWS offers a broad set of cloud services, which makes it easier to design and …
Amazon RDS excels with its widely adopted and mature ecosystem, supporting various database engines. While Azure SQL Database offers a tiered pricing structure and automatic patching, and Cloud SQL provides straightforward pricing and easy scaling, Amazon RDS's extensive …
MariaDB is perhaps the best open source database server available, combining a wide range of supported platforms, MySQL compatibility, a low footprint, and reasonably high performance. If you have cost constraints, or limited server resources, I recommend MariaDB, particularly …
MS SQL Server is like a BlackBox in many cases. Honestly we did not need advanced functionality that SQL server offers, just a plain DBMS. MariaDB is easier to manage, cross operating system, "lighter" with better performances than SQL server. We went with MariaDB Platform even …
It did not always compete against these technologies. Most of the time, it was complementing these databases for certain use cases to help provide a much more complete database. This makes more users want to use it to explore new solutions that help users. This is our target …
We tried Percona also, but we sometimes having trouble with it and on some cases it having lesser performance than MariaDB. MySQL is the the facto standard, we use this only in scenario that it cannot be replaced by MariaDB. MSSQL is used only if the client ask for Windows …
We were already wanting to migrate away from Cassandra for reasons of stability, cost (more servers were needed), and our data storage model. We evaluated PostgreSQL but passed on it due to being more familiar with MariaDB. Also we needed something that could do multi-region …
MariaDB is very similar to MySQL, but MariaDB has more alternative database engines and ideas for the future where MySQL is offers the stable and more mature version (if not stale).
(With and without RAC) My company migrated from Oracle to MariaDB. While MariaDB has some limitations (if you are used to Oracle) it has been much easier and cheaper (in several ways) to operate and has more than met my company's needs.
MariaDB is the clear winner compared to any other database I've used. Reliable, scale-able, affordable--you name the consideration and MariaDB is the winner.
MariaDB is much easier to set up and maintain compared to PostgreSQL makes it much faster to launch our application and relatively easier to upgrade its version so we can make sure the installed version is up to date with the latest patch, which is especially important if we …
MySQL is still a great solution, but MariaDB offers a more extensive set of free features than are available for MySQL. We also feel more confident that MariaDB will remain free to use over time. End users haven't noticed much of a difference, but from a development cost …
MariaDB stacks up the the competition just fine. Due to is ture open source nature we do not have to worry about licencing and spending money on nothing. Moreover, MariaDB does everything that we need to get done. We can run data that is a million rows or many smaller projects …
MariaDB provided the best fit for our business in upgrading legacy systems which were originally designed to use MySQL as a backend. By using MariaDB, no changes to the overall systems needed to be altered, reducing the time needed to upgrade everything. Other solutions …
Thanks to MySQL compatibility, everything you've learned while using it can be utilized when using MariaDB. Therefore it's a better choice than MongoDB and MSSQL if you're looking to switch away from MySQL. MariaDB is also a very mature and stable product, unlike MongoDB that …
MariaDB is cheaper than Oracle Database and MSSQL server. MySQL owned by Oracle. So MariaDB has too many forks, but enough people in the community. PostgreSQL has a larger community and better administration. However, it s not like MariaDB w/ Galera. MariaDB is not good for …
We know others DB alternatives like MySQL, Microsoft SQLServer, PostgreSQL. We selected MariaDB because it offer advanced features like active-active cluster, with no costs and easy to learn. With MariaDB was easy to migrate ours applications that use MySQL, with no …
We selected MariaDB over MySQL because of their true open source model and performance optimizations. It was also helpful that it is a drop-in replacement for MySQL so there was no need to update our various software drivers.
MariaDB costs much less than SQL Server to acquire and maintain. In comparison to Cassandra, it gives us operational use and helps in Agile development.
If your application needs a relational data store and uses other AWS services, AWS RDS is a no-brainer. It offers all the traditional database features, makes it a snap to set up, creates cross-region replication, has advanced security, built-in monitoring, and much more at a very good price. You can also set up streaming to a data lake using various other AWS services on your RDS.
Our installation scenario is a MariaDB cluster composed of 3 nodes to achieve high availability in the service and in this way the application that accesses the backend (MariaDB) is always working and is not down at any time.
To achieve high performance of the application when accessing the database, a MariaDB MaxScale has been mounted that acts as a proxy for queries to the database.
Automated Database Management: We use it for streamlining routine tasks like software patching and database backups.
Scalability on Demand: we use it to handle traffic spikes, scaling both vertically and horizontally.
Database Engine Compatibility: It works amazingly with multiple database engines used by different departments within our organization including MySQL, PostgreSQL, SQL Server, and Oracle.
Monitoring: It covers our extensive monitoring and logging, and also has great compatibility with Amazon CloudWatch
MariaDB does well with PHP or Python (django) in a web environment. Developers are able to work quickly.
MariaDB is extremely well documented and has a gigantic support community. If you need ask a question on how to do things you can go to many placces online and find answers quickly.
MariaDB is fast! Queries with tens of thousands of rows are quick.
MariaDB is highly compatible with Oracle's MySQL. Basically the same thing but more open and with a brighter future.
With MariaDB it is so easy to import and export data, and backups are a cinch. This saves me so much time as compared to other RDBMS.
It is a little difficult to configure and connect to an RDS instance. The integration with ECS can be made more seamless.
Exploring features within RDS is not very easy and intuitive. Either a human friendly documentation should be added or the User Interface be made intuitive so that people can explore and find features on their own.
There should be tools to analyze cost and minimize it according to the usage.
Driver Support - Some third party applications use database drivers that cause unexplained slowness with MariaDB. This can be worked around by using the MySQL drivers, but it's not clear what causes the problem in the first place.
Support - While online communities are helpful in diagnosing problems, there isn't as much professional documentation/support available for MariaDB as some of the other major database options.
Data Visualization - It would be helpful if there were more built in options for analyzing statistics and generating reports.
We do renew our use of Amazon Relational Database Service. We don't have any problems faced with RDS in place. RDS has taken away lot of overhead of hosting database, managing the database and keeping a team just to manage database. Even the backup, security and recovery another overhead that has been taken away by RDS. So, we will keep on using RDS.
I've been using AWS Relational Database Services in several projects in different environments and from the AWS products, maybe this one together to EC2 are my favourite. They deliver what they promise. Reliable, fast, easy and with a fair price (in comparison to commercial products which have obscure license agreements).
MariaDB is very usable and stable to be used in production settings as an alternative to MySQL. The shortcomings of SQL are present but well understood in the community, and if the decision were to be made again, I would choose MariaDB over MySQL on future projects.
I have only had good experiences in working with AWS support. I will admit that my experience comes from the benefit of having a premium tier of support but even working with free-tier accounts I have not had problems getting help with AWS products when needed. And most often, the docs do a pretty good job of explaining how to operate a service so a quick spin through the docs has been useful in solving problems.
Yes, I would recommend MariaDB Platform support because they answer very fast and with detailed information. They also help you with the design of the storage infrastructure, not only with the maintenance problems. On the other hand, this service is a bit expensive.
Amazon Relational Database Service (RDS) stands out among similar products due to its seamless integration with other AWS services, automated backups, and multi-AZ deployments for high availability. Its support for various database engines, such as MySQL, PostgreSQL, and Oracle, provides flexibility. Additionally, RDS offers managed security features, including encryption and IAM integration, enhancing data protection. The pay-as-you-go pricing model makes it cost-effective. Overall, Amazon RDS excels in ease of use, scalability, and a comprehensive feature set, making it a top choice for organizations seeking a reliable and scalable managed relational database service in the cloud.
It did not always compete against these technologies. Most of the time, it was complementing these databases for certain use cases to help provide a much more complete database. This makes more users want to use it to explore new solutions that help users. This is our target and how [we] work with MariaDb.
MariaDB has saved us enormously on licensing compared to our previous DB software vendor.
In service, it has enabled us (speaking as the internal DB team here) to provide better service to the other teams in the company as well as our customers, with less staff.
The level of hardware required for adequate performance, in our environment, has been much lower. Those savings have been substantial, above and beyond savings on licensing and DBA staffing levels.