Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Modern cloud architecture on AWS: server fleets and databases

start.jcolemorrison.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

1–10 of 54 posts

Re: Modern cloud architecture on AWS: server fleets and databases

#4

Post by Jonnax »

At what scale would you want to use RDS rather than using an EC2 instance with Postgres installed?

Assuming that the operator has the skills to manage Postgres.

It's not like RDS does something complex like Geodistribution, right?

Also what is the scaling like? Is it automatic? How quickly can you handle more connections? Because my understanding was that it was slow.

I did have a play with their RDS Postgres nonths before, and I managed somehow to crash it requiring a restore from snapshot. Also their smallest instance was quite expensive for the performance.

Re: Modern cloud architecture on AWS: server fleets and databases

#5

Post by Roritharr »

kamilafsar wrote: post #2

I keep reading all these horror stories about Aurora (especially PostgreSQL). Is there anyone out there with an alternative story?

Using Aurora MySQL for over a year now in prod, purrs like a kittycat.

Just don't use the AWS Database Migration Service if you can help it, that thing has a couple of badly documented pitfalls. (Fe. tables can't have ENUM fields)

Re: Modern cloud architecture on AWS: server fleets and databases

#6

Post by paxy »

Jonnax wrote: post #4

At what scale would you want to use RDS rather than using an EC2 instance with Postgres installed? Assuming that the operator has the skills to manage Postgres. It's not like RDS does something complex like Geodistribution, right? Also what is the scaling like? Is it automatic? How quickly can you handle more connections? Because my understanding was that it was slow. I did have a play with their RDS Postgres nonths…

RDS/Aurora does do autoscaling, backups, georeplication, encryption etc. It's more a matter of time & convenience rather than skill. Sure you could do all of it yourself on an EC2 instance, but at some point it becomes a big chunk of your job, and you would rather be spending your time on other things.

Re: Modern cloud architecture on AWS: server fleets and databases

#7

Post by popotamonga »

kamilafsar wrote: post #2

I keep reading all these horror stories about Aurora (especially PostgreSQL). Is there anyone out there with an alternative story?

10 separate xlarge instances pgsql and never had a single issue in 3 yrs of heavy use. What stories are those?

Re: Modern cloud architecture on AWS: server fleets and databases

#8

Post by zedpm »

Jonnax wrote: post #4

At what scale would you want to use RDS rather than using an EC2 instance with Postgres installed? Assuming that the operator has the skills to manage Postgres. It's not like RDS does something complex like Geodistribution, right? Also what is the scaling like? Is it automatic? How quickly can you handle more connections? Because my understanding was that it was slow. I did have a play with their RDS Postgres nonths…

It isn't a matter of getting to a certain scale before you use RDS, if that's what you're asking. The value of RDS is streamlining and automating db administrative tasks. If you want to update from Postgres 11.5 to 11.6, for example, you just change that setting on your RDS instance and it happens, either immediately or at some scheduled maintenance window. I f you want a hot standby in a separate availability zone, it's trivial to add one. Read replica? Trivial to add.

In general, I've found it makes sense to pay the premium for RDS and spend my and my team's time on more valuable work than db admin tasks.

Re: Modern cloud architecture on AWS: server fleets and databases

#9

Post by pestaa »

Jonnax wrote: post #4

At what scale would you want to use RDS rather than using an EC2 instance with Postgres installed? Assuming that the operator has the skills to manage Postgres. It's not like RDS does something complex like Geodistribution, right? Also what is the scaling like? Is it automatic? How quickly can you handle more connections? Because my understanding was that it was slow. I did have a play with their RDS Postgres nonths…

There are advantages when using RDS other than scaling.

The performance dashboard is especially nice.

The reusable sets of configuration is convenient and the UI makes it easy to compare original vs. changed values.

The instance upgrade is not seamless, though, it is normally scheduled for the next maintenance window, unless you decide to apply and reboot immediately.

I agree the service is expensive, but setting up a db server for production takes a lot of time and expertise.

Re: Modern cloud architecture on AWS: server fleets and databases

#10

Post by pdeva1 »

Jonnax wrote: post #4

At what scale would you want to use RDS rather than using an EC2 instance with Postgres installed? Assuming that the operator has the skills to manage Postgres. It's not like RDS does something complex like Geodistribution, right? Also what is the scaling like? Is it automatic? How quickly can you handle more connections? Because my understanding was that it was slow. I did have a play with their RDS Postgres nonths…

one thing that doesn't get talked about RDS is that network cost for replication of data for RDS multi A-Z deployments is free. Depending on how much you write to RDS, this cost can dominate cpu/memory costs on non-RDS installations.
Post reply on HN