Feb
26
Comparing Postgre RDS vs Redshift Pricing Estimation
Overview
RDS with PostgreSQL is cost-effective for general-purpose databases, while Redshift seems more economical for large-scale data analytics due to lower storage costs.Matching use cases are using RDS for transactional applications and Redshift for analytical queries on big datasets, with costs varying by workload.An unexpected detail is that Redshift's compute costs per hour can be higher, but its storage is significantly cheaper, affecting total cost based on data size.Pricing Comparison
RDS with PostgreSQL pricing includes compute costs (e.g., $0.384/hour for a db.m5.xlarge instance) and storage costs (e.g., $0.125/GB-month for gp2). For example, a 1 TB setup might cost around $405.32 monthly.
RDS with PostgreSQL is cost-effective for general-purpose databases, while Redshift seems more economical for large-scale data analytics due to lower storage costs.Matching use cases are using RDS for transactional applications and Redshift for analytical queries on big datasets, with costs varying by workload.An unexpected detail is that Redshift's compute costs per hour can be higher, but its storage is significantly cheaper, affecting total cost based on data size.Pricing Comparison
RDS with PostgreSQL pricing includes compute costs (e.g., $0.384/hour for a db.m5.xlarge instance) and storage costs (e.g., $0.125/GB-month for gp2). For example, a 1 TB setup might cost around $405.32 monthly.