Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Amazon RDS for Aurora vs Amazon S3 vs CloudAMQP: What are the differences?
Introduction
In this Markdown code, we will provide a comparison between Amazon RDS for Aurora, Amazon S3, and CloudAMQP. We will highlight the key differences between these services, specifically focusing on their functionalities and use cases.
Scalability and Performance: Amazon RDS for Aurora is a highly scalable and performant relational database service, designed to handle large workloads and provide consistent performance. It uses a distributed architecture with auto-scaling capabilities to accommodate growing storage and compute needs. On the other hand, Amazon S3 is an object storage service primarily designed for storing and retrieving large amounts of data. It offers excellent scalability and can handle a virtually unlimited number of objects, making it ideal for data lakes and backup repositories. CloudAMQP, on the other hand, is a managed message queuing service that focuses on scalability and high-performance messaging. It provides efficient message handling and delivery, making it suitable for event-driven architectures.
Data Structure and Querying: Amazon RDS for Aurora supports traditional SQL databases like MySQL and PostgreSQL, providing support for complex querying and ACID transactions. It is suitable for applications that require strong relational database capabilities. Amazon S3, on the other hand, is an object storage service that does not provide structured querying capabilities like SQL. Instead, it offers simple key-value object retrieval using a unique identifier. It is commonly used for storing and retrieving unstructured or semi-structured data like documents, images, and videos. CloudAMQP is a messaging service and does not provide querying capabilities like a traditional database. It focuses on efficient message routing and delivery.
Data Consistency and Durability: Amazon RDS for Aurora ensures data consistency by using multiple replicas in different availability zones. It provides immediate consistency for both reads and writes, ensuring that data is always up to date. It also offers automated backups and point-in-time recovery options to protect data. Amazon S3, on the other hand, provides eventual consistency for object updates, which means that it may take some time for updates to propagate across all regions. However, it provides 11 nines (99.999999999%) of durability for stored objects, making it highly reliable. CloudAMQP ensures message delivery by using redundant RabbitMQ clusters and offers message persistence options for guaranteeing message durability.
Storage and Pricing Model: Amazon RDS for Aurora provisions storage based on the allocated database instance size, with additional storage capacity for growth. It uses a pay-as-you-go pricing model, where you pay for the compute and storage resources. Amazon S3 provides separate pricing for storage, data transfer, and requests. It offers highly affordable storage costs and a tiered pricing structure based on storage class and retrieval frequency. CloudAMQP pricing is based on the chosen plan and usage, with different plans catering to different message throughputs and features. It offers flexibility in selecting the required plan based on messaging requirements.
Managed Service and Administration: Amazon RDS for Aurora is a fully managed service, which means that Amazon takes care of the underlying infrastructure, patching, and maintenance tasks. It offers automated backups, replication, and automatic software updates. Amazon S3 is also a fully managed service, handling replication, monitoring, and data integrity checks. However, it does not provide built-in database management capabilities like Amazon RDS for Aurora. CloudAMQP is a fully managed messaging service, handling infrastructure management, scaling, and monitoring of RabbitMQ clusters. It offers easy integration with various cloud platforms and simplifies message-oriented application development.
Use Cases and Application Scenarios: AWS RDS for Aurora is suitable for applications that require a highly available, scalable, and reliable relational database. It can be used for a wide range of use cases, including transactional workloads, content management systems, and e-commerce platforms. Amazon S3 is ideal for storing and retrieving large amounts of unstructured data, such as media files, logs, and backups. It is commonly used for data lakes, content delivery, static website hosting, and archiving. CloudAMQP is designed for scenarios where reliable messaging and event-driven architectures are required. It is used in various applications, including microservices, IoT data processing, and real-time analytics.
In summary, Amazon RDS for Aurora is a scalable and performant relational database service, Amazon S3 is an object storage service for large-scale data storage, and CloudAMQP is a managed messaging service for efficient message handling. Each service has different strengths and use cases, making them suitable for various types of applications and workloads.
Hello! I have a mobile app with nearly 100k MAU, and I want to add a cloud file storage service to my app.
My app will allow users to store their image, video, and audio files and retrieve them to their device when necessary.
I have already decided to use PHP & Laravel as my backend, and I use Contabo VPS. Now, I need an object storage service for my app, and my options are:
Amazon S3 : It sounds to me like the best option but the most expensive. Closest to my users (MENA Region) for other services, I will have to go to Europe. Not sure how important this is?
DigitalOcean Spaces : Seems like my best option for price/service, but I am still not sure
Wasabi: the best price (6 USD/MONTH/TB) and free bandwidth, but I am not sure if it fits my needs as I want to allow my users to preview audio and video files. They don't recommend their service for streaming videos.
Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage: Good price but not sure about them.
There is also the self-hosted s3 compatible option, but I am not sure about that.
Any thoughts will be helpful. Also, if you think I should post in a different sub, please tell me.
If pricing is the issue i'd suggest you use digital ocean, but if its not use amazon was digital oceans API is s3 compatible
Hello Mohammad, I am using : Cloudways >> AWS >> Bahrain for last 2 years. This is best I consider out of my 10 year research on Laravel hosting.
In addition to being a lot cheaper, Google Cloud Pub/Sub allowed us to not worry about maintaining any more infrastructure that needed.
We moved from a self-hosted RabbitMQ over to CloudAMQP and decided that since we use GCP anyway, why not try their managed PubSub?
It is one of the better decisions that we made, and we can just focus about building more important stuff!
We offer our customer HIPAA compliant storage. After analyzing the market, we decided to go with Google Storage. The Nodejs API is ok, still not ES6 and can be very confusing to use. For each new customer, we created a different bucket so they can have individual data and not have to worry about data loss. After 1000+ customers we started seeing many problems with the creation of new buckets, with saving or retrieving a new file. Many false positive: the Promise returned ok, but in reality, it failed.
That's why we switched to S3 that just works.
Pros of Amazon Aurora
- MySQL compatibility14
- Better performance12
- Easy read scalability10
- Speed9
- Low latency read replica7
- High IOPS cost2
- Good cost performance1
Pros of Amazon S3
- Reliable590
- Scalable492
- Cheap456
- Simple & easy329
- Many sdks83
- Logical30
- Easy Setup13
- REST API11
- 1000+ POPs11
- Secure6
- Easy4
- Plug and play4
- Web UI for uploading files3
- Faster on response2
- Flexible2
- GDPR ready2
- Easy to use1
- Plug-gable1
- Easy integration with CloudFront1
Pros of CloudAMQP
- Some of the best customer support you'll ever find4
- Easy to provision3
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Amazon Aurora
- Vendor locking2
- Rigid schema1
Cons of Amazon S3
- Permissions take some time to get right7
- Requires a credit card6
- Takes time/work to organize buckets & folders properly6
- Complex to set up3