Amazon Aurora vs CockroachDB

AWS's database that makes you feel fancy without the price tag of Oracle, but still costs more than your rent meets the cockroach of databases: hard to kill, spreads everywhere, and surprisingly good at sql. 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

CockroachDB

The cockroach of databases: hard to kill, spreads everywhere, and surprisingly good at SQL.

Pros

• Strong consistency across distributed nodes without manual sharding
• PostgreSQL wire protocol compatibility for easy migration
• Automatic data replication and rebalancing for high availability

Cons

• Higher latency compared to single-node databases due to distributed overhead
• Complex licensing and pricing can be a headache for scaling

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 CockroachDB if: You prioritize strong consistency across distributed nodes without manual sharding 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.