Amazon RDS Reviews

The solution helps us to move databases from on-premises to other areas. 

Amazon RDS has helped in reducing the median cost for on-prem services.

Amazon RDS is easy to maintain and easy to deploy.

The running cost could be improved.

I have been using the solution for one year.

It is a stable solution. I rate it eight out of ten. 

The solution's scalability depends on the application. There are no fixed users. I plan to increase the usage of the solution. 

Previously, I used Oracle SQL but switched to Amazon RDS because it's easy to manage and easy to set.

The initial setup is easy. For the deployment, one has to prepare the pipeline and set up the security configuration. The complete deployment takes a couple of days. Three software engineers are required in the deployment process. I rate the setup an eight out of ten.

The solution is expensive.

I would advise others to use the solution as it is easy to deploy, but they will need to take care of the running cost. 

I rate the overall solution an eight 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.

We have on-prem servers and our database is hosted in the cloud on Amazon RDS. Everything is automated there, like setting up backups and replication. We have around 40 persons using RDS.

Amazon RDS gives us the ability to select as many tools, replicas, regions, and zones as we want.

I've used Amazon RDS for six or seven years.

RDS is stable. A cloud solution is always stable, and RDS servers are solid.

Amazon RDS is highly scalable. It is much simpler to scale up compared to an on-premise solution where you need to buy new hardware and migrate all the data. Ifwe need more capacity, there is a symbol that you can click on to upgrade your hardware. 

If you want one more server in a different region, you can spin it up and everything is done on the cloud. You can just select what you need and go, whether you're going to downgrade or upgrade to system type TX for whatever configuration you want.

Amazon support is good, but we've only communicated with them via email so far. We email support when we have questions, and they've always come up with the proper solution.

Before Amazon, we had MySQL and PostgreSQL, but it's not like we switched We still have on-premise solutions and some things in the cloud. Most of our stuff is still on-prem. It depends on if it's a critical application that is heavily used, so you don't have downtime.

Installation is straightforward. You choose your database for RDS, like MySQL, Oracle, PostgreSQL, MongoDB, etc., and select the distance type. It takes a maximum of five minutes time to select and set up the system. Our servers can be up and running in 10 to 15 minutes, and data migration took about an hour.

We have several in-house teams with separate databases, so they usually take care of it for us. I worked on some databases. We have a different method for RDS. One stacked, so we build our own scripts and publish them in the stack.

Amazon RDS is a little costly, but it also reduces the number of full-time employees needed. We require fewer system admins or DBS because RDS reduces our workload. 

It's pay as you go. Once you are using it, you will get support. You don't need to buy a yearly license to get support. If we deployed our server there, we would get support from them.

I rate Amazon RDS nine out of 10. I recommend it. Cost is the only issue. RDS is one of the best choices if you need scalability and reliability, but you're not worried about the cost.

Some of the features will not be there. For example, some on-premises things we want to set up will not be supported there. There are some challenges there that they are fixing. 

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.