Ever since it was unveiled in November of last year, AWS Aurora—Amazon’s relational database offering available through Amazon RDS—has been touted by the giant online retailer as a revolutionary database solution that offered five times the performance of standard MySQL at “one tenth the cost of a commercial database.”
Indeed, Aurora does offer upgrades over legacy database solutions. Like ClustrixDB—our shared nothing clustered scale-out MySQL-compatible relational database—both databases share a number of significant features and benefits, including the following:
- Works as a “drop-in” replacement for MySQL
- Provides significant upgrade over MySQL performance
- Offers high availability
- Includes robust recovery and fault tolerance capabilities
- Scales reads quickly and efficiently
- So, how do these capabilities measure up to ClustrixDB? There are also substantial differences between Clustrix’s flagship product and Aurora, as well as features that are unique to
ClustrixDB. For example, Aurora requires changes to the application to send read queries to the slaves. ClustrixDB does not require application changes to scale. Perhaps the most critical difference between ClustrixDB and Aurora is that ClustrixDB massively scales both writes and reads. Conversely, although Aurora points to scalability as one of its primary differentiators, in truth, it is only able to easily and efficiently scale reads—not writes. ClustrixDB:
- Scales writes and reads
- Can FLEX writes and reads both up and down
- Is agnostic to the cloud environment so you’re not limited to AWS for cloud services
- Can replicate to any other database supporting the Mysql replication protocol .
- Can run on virtual and bare-metal servers, in public clouds or your own datacenter
ClustrixDB makes it simple and easy for e-commerce businesses to scale capacity by allowing them to “Flex Up” both write and read capacity—during peak traffic periods such as holiday seasons — in the cloud by adding nodes with just a few clicks. When the peak season is over or traffic slows, click a few more times and flex capacity back down, ensuring they are not paying for resources and licensing they no longer need.
Aurora also provides “click to add server” functionality—but only for read slaves, a key difference to consider when evaluating the two products side by side. Because it is built on a single write-master, read-slave architecture Aurora has no seamless solution for scaling writes. In contrast, a ClustrixDB “cluster” contains three or more servers, each with the capability of handling full writes and reads; there are no ‘master’, ‘slave’, ‘compute’ or ‘standby’ nodes.
Time and again, both in benchmark studies and through customer success stories, ClustrixDB has demonstrated superior flexibility and scalability. Both Aurora and ClustrixDB run in AWS and both are significant upgrades for web applications such as e-commerce over yesterday’s level of MySQL performance; but for fast growing businesses looking to take full advantage of what the cloud offers, only a database solution that was specifically designed for the scale-out cloud offers seamless, nearly limitless scalability for both reads and writes. ClustrixDB is that solution.
Are you interested in learning more about how ClustrixDB works? You’re in luck! Request a free trial and take the first step down the path of ultimate scalability.