Amazon Aurora vs Azure SQL Database

AWS's database that makes you feel fancy without the price tag of Oracle, but still costs more than your rent meets sql server's cloud-bound cousin. Here's our take.

Amazon Aurora

Nice Pick

AWS's database that makes you feel fancy without the price tag of Oracle, but still costs more than your rent.

Pros

• Fully managed with automatic scaling, backups, and patching
• Up to 5x MySQL and 3x PostgreSQL performance with cloud-optimized storage
• High availability and durability through multi-AZ replication
• MySQL and PostgreSQL compatibility for easy migration

Cons

• Can get expensive quickly with scaling and I/O costs
• Vendor lock-in to AWS ecosystem
• Limited to AWS regions, which might affect latency for global apps

Azure SQL Database

SQL Server's cloud-bound cousin. All the enterprise-grade features, none of the hardware headaches.

Pros

• Fully managed with automated backups and high availability
• Built-in intelligence for performance tuning and security
• Supports serverless compute and Hyperscale for massive scalability

Cons

• Can get pricey for high-performance workloads
• Limited to Microsoft SQL Server compatibility

The Verdict

Use Amazon Aurora if: You want fully managed with automatic scaling, backups, and patching and can live with can get expensive quickly with scaling and i/o costs.

Use Azure SQL Database if: You prioritize fully managed with automated backups and high availability over what Amazon Aurora offers.

The Bottom Line

Amazon Aurora wins

AWS's database that makes you feel fancy without the price tag of Oracle, but still costs more than your rent.