Hello there!!
I’m wondering if Aurora Serverless v3 is in development, as I find both v1 and v2 don’t fully meet the definition of a true serverless database.
Specifically, I would like a version where: • Compute costs are zero when there is no database access, and charges apply only for storage during idle periods. • This approach would enable cost-efficient use cases, such as one database per tenant or maintaining active secondary regions, where only storage costs are incurred in secondary regions during inactivity.
The pricing model I envision would charge for query and write time, plus storage, but no compute charges if the database is idle.
Neon seems to offer something like this. Is AWS planning a similar model for Aurora Serverless?
Thanks!a
Aurora Serverless V2 is 30% faster now..... but how?
New to Aurora Serverless & serverless in general
Variable workloads
You're running an infrequently-used application, with peaks of 30 minutes to several hours a few times each day or several times per year, such as a human resources, budgeting, or operational reporting application. You no longer have to provision to peak capacity, which would require you to pay for resources you don't continuously use, or to average capacity, which would risk performance problems and a poor user experience.
Scaled-out databases split across multiple servers
Customers with high write or read requirements often split databases across several instances to achieve higher throughput. However, customers often provision too many or too few instances, increasing cost or limiting scale. With Aurora serverless, customers split databases across several Aurora instances and let the service adjust capacity instantly and automatically based on need. It seamlessly adjusts capacity for each node with no downtime or disruption, and uses only the amount of capacity needed to support applications.
Software as a service applications
Software as a service (SaaS) vendors typically operate hundreds or thousands of Aurora databases, each supporting a different customer, in a single cluster to improve utilization and cost efficiency. But they still need to manage each database individually, including monitoring for and responding to colocate databases in the same cluster that may take up more shared resources than originally planned. With Aurora serverless, SaaS vendors can provision Aurora database clusters for each individual customer without worrying about costs of provisioned capacity. It automatically shuts down databases when they are not in use to save costs and instantly adjusts databases capacity to meet changing application requirements.
Videos
Per this linked press release Aurora Serverless V2 is now 30% faster if you have the latest version - v3. But I dont see any details. What is faster....IO? Queries? Absolutely Everything? Are all my query times going to be slashed by 30 across the board? Also does it apply to a specific version of v3? Looks like 3.10 was released a few days ago.
I checked the Aurora release notes but nothing look pertinent to such a sweeping claim of performance improvements.
Anyone have anything more substantial to share to shed some light here?
Hi
I'm new to Aurora Serverless as well as serverless services in general. I'm looking for relational db managed services that support foreign keys (I looked up planetscale, but they don't support it) that doesn't cost too much.
The usage is for hobby project.
I'm thinking to use Aurora Serverless v2 but I'm confused with the pricing calculator especially about the number of ACU running per hour. Shouldn't serverless mean "pay as you go"? Why the calculator say monthly cost?
Does the pricing calculator assume the instance keeps running and never stops due to inactivity for 30 day straight? For how long of inactivity that the db instance would stop on its own?