Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Amazon Aurora Serverless vs MariaDB comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 4, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon Aurora Serverless
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
22nd
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.8
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
MariaDB
Ranking in Relational Databases Tools
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
59
Ranking in other categories
Open Source Databases (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Relational Databases Tools category, the mindshare of Amazon Aurora Serverless is 0.3%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MariaDB is 6.6%, down from 9.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Relational Databases Tools
 

Featured Reviews

MohitGupta3 - PeerSpot reviewer
Seamless growth management through serverless efficiency and reasonable pricing
The most valuable feature of Amazon Aurora Serverless is its serverless nature, which means I do not have to maintain the underlying infrastructure. Additionally, it is highly scalable, and its pricing model is favorable. Aurora's automatic scaling greatly enhances our operational efficiency by eliminating the need to set specific thresholds and preventing client data access issues due to uneven growth. Its serverless setup allows us to manage costs effectively. Other notable features include direct integration with tools like SFTP Go for media file uploads, automatic backups ensuring data recovery, and its scalability in terms of handling growing database demands.
KumarManish - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to deploy, cost-effective, and integrates seamlessly with other products
We had planned for an RDBMS version and not NoSQL. We use MariaDB Galera Cluster. It's a good product. It is cheap, scalable, performs well, and is efficient. We use GCP’s BigQuery for machine learning. We must follow the best practices of the tool. We missed some best practices like the storage engine and InnoDB. It was very difficult to identify why we were having performance issues. Then, we realized that some of our tables were still on MyISAM, the default storage engine. When we switched it back to the InnoDB, it was very smooth. InnoDB is the recommended one. We must follow the best practices given in the documentation during the initial setup. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Aurora could improve its affordability, even though its price is very completive compared to DBs as SLQ Server."
"The most valuable feature of Amazon Aurora Serverless is its serverless nature, which means I do not have to maintain the underlying infrastructure."
"Amazon Aurora Serverless is easy to scale, offering a cluster-based shared scaling model with options for Autoscale."
"MariaDB can solve things better than MySQL. Maria DB has better performance than MySQL."
"The most valuable feature is that it uses multiple cores, which is better than some of the other databases."
"This solution is user-friendly."
"Easy to use and available in most environments."
"Visual Studio offers unit testing integration and extensive searching capabilities."
"We like the easy way that we can collect data from other databases."
"I am editing."
"One of the great features of MariaDB is its scalability. It's easy to handle even with large databases."
 

Cons

"Amazon Aurora could improve its detailed monitoring, especially in CloudWatch, to provide more precise query level insights."
"Aurora could improve its affordability, as it is currently considered a bit expensive."
"Amazon Aurora Serverless could benefit from a few more security features, particularly in terms of its accessibility."
"Replication could be better, and it's not so simple. It would be better if they had a replication server. It would make things a lot easier. You need to have that replication server, but not in the same server farm. Then there will be a bit of latency between both because you should have one in one city and another one in a different city. That kind of solution should be more baked into every single database today. Mirroring the database in a live environment where any record written on the production server replicates instantly across the fiber on the other server wasn't easy. Many people don't even bother with that, and they just run one server."
"MariaDB doesn't handle long or complex SQL queries quite as well as Oracle Database."
"A well-known issue for a lot of different users is associated with write-intensive applications."
"MariaDB's GUI is an area with certain shortcomings where improvements are required."
"The solution can improve by having support for more integration. However, at this time it is working well for us."
"I’m not sure if it can scale."
"It should work across all fields like SQLite, as it is the basis of any application, even apps for phones and the like."
"I'd like to see improved materialized views, like the ability to save select queries. This feature is missing in MariaDB compared to other relational databases like Oracle and SQL Server."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"When it comes to MariaDB, it should have a more cost-effective license."
"The price of this solution represents a very good compromise between the cost and what it offers."
"My company uses the free version of the solution."
"The cost is quite good. You can have the open source, free version, which has adequate capacity."
"I used the open-source version, which is available free of charge."
"The price could be less expensive."
"We use the solution's free version."
"It is free of charge."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Relational Databases Tools solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon Aurora Serverless?
In my experience, Aurora is a bit expensive. The costs depend on the size of the database.
What needs improvement with Amazon Aurora Serverless?
Aurora could improve its affordability, as it is currently considered a bit expensive. There is room to make it more cost-effective for users even though its price is very completive compared to DB...
What is your primary use case for Amazon Aurora Serverless?
I use Aurora mainly for creating and maintaining databases, such as Aurora (MySQL version) databases, within the system. I value it for its network security and quicker recovery options.
What do you like most about MariaDB?
The integration with other products is seamless.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for MariaDB?
I have found the price of commercial MariaDB to be pretty steep, although not as high as Oracle. Customers often prefer the Community Edition because it's free.
What needs improvement with MariaDB?
The only potential area for improvement could be the pricing model, which might benefit from being more flexible or a bit cheaper.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Google, Wikipedia, Tencent, Verizon, DBS Bank, Deutsche Bank, Telefónica, Huatai Securities
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Aurora Serverless vs. MariaDB and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.