News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Amazon Aurora with PostgreSQL Compatibility. Parent comment

Re:Amazon Aurora with PostgreSQL Compatibility by purephase on Tuesday October 24, 2017 @09:03PM (#15546530)
Same here. Odd choices, but I'm assuming there's a reason for it.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Amazon Aurora with PostgreSQL Compatibility by samstave on Tuesday October 24, 2017 @09:23PM (#15546632)
Just a guess, but I would bet that they are looking for the people who want aurora+postgress on larger workloads (ostensibly housed in far fewer accounts/support-blast-radius) than to offer shards to thousands of one-off testers/smaller companies that may inundate the bandwidth of the actual human staff.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Amazon Aurora with PostgreSQL Compatibility by llsf on Tuesday October 24, 2017 @09:30PM (#15546678)
I thought the same, but the Aurora MySQL does allow smaller instances. So, waiting as well for smaller instances on Aurora Postgres...
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Amazon Aurora with PostgreSQL Compatibility by markporter_aws on Tuesday October 24, 2017 @09:59PM (#15546791)
Which particular types and combination of CPU/RAM would you like?
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Amazon Aurora with PostgreSQL Compatibility by jeffasinger on Tuesday October 24, 2017 @10:20PM (#15546879)
At a minimum, I'd like to see something half the size of the r4.large. The current r4.large is definitely bigger than I'd want to use for an experiment with a few users.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Amazon Aurora with PostgreSQL Compatibility by markporter_aws on Tuesday October 24, 2017 @10:41PM (#15547003)
Jeff, that makes sense. We're working on it. Thanks for the information!
[ Parent | on HN ]