You will find all the details of our comparison and all the information required to run the benchmark yourself using the Time-Series Benchmarking Suite (TSBS). In this blog post, we share a benchmark comparing the performance of Timescale to Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL. Timescale has always strived to enhance PostgreSQL with the ingestion, query performance, and cost-efficiency boosts that developers need to run their data-intensive applications, all while providing a seamless developer experience with advanced features to ease working with time-series data.īut don’t take our word for it-let the numbers speak for themselves. Since Timescale is still PostgreSQL and already in AWS, the transition from RDS is swift: Timescale integrates with your PostgreSQL-based application directly and plays nicely with your AWS infrastructure. Timescale runs on AWS, offering hosted PostgreSQL with added time-series superpowers. A time-series database is discussed, but the developers and the application still rely on PostgreSQL features.ĭoes it sound familiar? It’s usually at this stage when developers realize that Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL is no longer a good choice for their applications, start seeking alternatives, and come across Timescale. The database is now holding the application hostage regarding performance and AWS spending.Bills skyrocket, while the improvements are only temporary. Eventually, in an effort to keep up, instance sizes are increased, and larger, faster volumes are created.Operational complexity grows, and more points of failure are introduced. Partitioning is implemented, materialized views are configured (destroying the ability to get real-time results), and schedules are created for view refreshes and partition maintenance. As the database becomes a bottleneck, it becomes a target for optimization.Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL works well at first, but as the volume of time-series data in their database grows, they notice slower ingestion, sluggish query performance, and growing storage costs.The team is focused on shipping features, so they choose the path of least resistance-Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL. At the start of a project, developers choose PostgreSQL because it’s a database they know and love.When we talk to these customers, we often see a pattern: Timescale fits them perfectly, and this article will present benchmarks that help explain why. They need a solution that will let them keep using PostgreSQL while not blocking them from getting value out of their time-series data. These developers usually struggle with performance issues on ingest, sluggish real-time or historical queries, and spiraling storage costs. For example, the UI lists: 10.11, 11.6īut the command line tool only lists: 10.17, 10.18, 10.19, 10.2, 11.12, 11.13, 11.14, 11.Since we launched Timescale, our cloud-hosted PostgreSQL service for time-series data and event and analytics workloads, we have seen large numbers of customers migrating onto it from the general-purpose Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL. However, I can't find any instance class that lists an engine version shown in the admin console. How do I fix this error?įrom this similar article, I found I can get a list of allowed Postgres versions by running: aws rds describe-orderable-db-instance-options -engine postgres -db-instance-class db.m5.large -query 'OrderableDBInstanceOptions.EngineVersion' Googling the error messages finds me no documentation about which combinations are supported. I tried a few different instance sizes and engine versions, and it gives me the same general message. For supported combinations of instance class and database engine version, see the documentation. So I logged in, and bumped up my instance size from m1.small to m5.large (the smallest they still have), clicked apply, and it gave me this error message: RDS does not support creating a DB instance with the following combination: DBInstanceClass=db.m5.large, Engine=postgres, EngineVersion=9.4.25, LicenseModel=postgresql-license. AWS recently notified me I need to upgrade an RDS instance that's using an instance type that's being removed.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |