Amazon RDS Performance vs. Xeround Cloud Database: Benchmark Results
** This benchmark was updated on February 6, 2013, following Xeround’s recent release which introduced significant performance improvements.
The following is a comparison of Amazon RDS performance to Xeround, since both offer MySQL Database-as-a-Service (yet – as you can see from our feature comparison – Amazon RDS is not a truly elastic cloud database).
The Amazon RDS performance tests were conducted using DBT-2, a standard database benchmark application.
All tests were conducted on Amazon RDS live commercial service.
Data – Both Xeround MySQL Cloud Database and Amazon RDS’ database were loaded with exactly the same data, which was generated by the DBT-2 test program in transactional operation mode. The overall loaded data size was ~15GB of raw data.
|Amazon RDS for MySQL||Xeround Cloud Database for MySQL|
RDS’ m2.4xLArge instance - High-Memory Quadruple Extra Large Instance, 68.4 GB of memory, 26 EC2 Compute Units (8 virtual cores with 3.25 EC2 Compute Units each), 64-bit platform, High I/O Performance
|Standard virtual instance (that scales as needed) with 2 built-in replicas per record|
Default RDS does not include high availability, failover, or replication.
In addition, we tested against Multi-AZ RDS to account for AWS’ option with replication, using RDS m2.4XLarge instances.
|High availability, failover and synchronous replication included by default with Xeround’s PRO edition.|
Amazon RDS Performance vs. Xeround – Standard DBT-2
DBT-2 New Order Transactions per Minute (NOTPM)
A transaction consists of a few dozens of SQL statements, including queries, updates, inserts and deletions.
Analysis of the standard DBT-2 benchmark test
As shown, Amazon RDS performs better when dealing with small numbers of concurrent users. However, as the number of concurrent users increases, RDS’ performance decreases substantially, whereas Xeround’s performance increases as the number of concurrent users grows, significantly exceeding the performance of Amazon RDS. This case clearly demonstrates the high level of parallelism achieved by Xeround’s technology, with stable performance that does not drop significantly when serving more concurrent users.
RDS’s latency increases dramatically as the number of concurrent users grows, whereas Xeround’s latency increase is much slower.
Xeround has a much broader bandwidth compared to Amazon RDS, and can easily deal with a larger number of users. If needed, Xeround can scale-out even more (not demonstrated in this test) to deal with more users and provide better performance.
Wondering how we’re doing compared to Rackspace MySQL Cloud?
Rackspace recently announced a cloud database for MySQL based on Openstack (previously code named ‘RedDwarf’). Unlike Xeround, Rackspace’s solution does not offer automatic scalability or high availability, no automatic backups, and it currently has other operational limitations (such as not being able to create a DB or users programatically via DBL.)
For this Benchmark we used Rackspace’s largest instance size (4GB memory and 50GB disk size).
Xeround’s MySQL cloud database offers a leap forward compared to “old school” database technology, offering significantly better handling of large numbers of concurrent users, and very stable performance and latency under high loads.
Xeround Cloud Database offers many additional features, which were not covered in this benchmark test, including the following:
- Automatic scaling
- High availability
- Ease of use
- Zero maintenance
- …and much more.
When considering all the benefits of a true cloud database, Xeround is the preferred choice of developers and businesses for their database application requirements in the cloud.
Have additional questions?
Email us at firstname.lastname@example.org if you have any feedback or questions.
You may also wish to consult our detailed Amazon RDS vs. Xeround feature comparison.