Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Ouch. This pricing is pretty rough for SaaS sold on the premise of cloud scalability.

At $200/month for the entry level, their lowest price is many times what the cheapest geo-replicated "SQL engine as a service" from Google or Microsoft is. I'm not sure how the performance differs, but I am guessing theirs are no slouches.

Microsoft offers "SQL Database" geo-replicated for as low as $15/mo., and it scales up from there. Not sure about performance, but it would be apples to oranges (MySQL versus SQL Server) and difficult to compare. I wonder what the TPC numbers are, but apparently the TPC organization doesn't allow publishing that yet.

Google offers "Google Cloud SQL", also geo-replicated, and their cheapest pricing is between $10 and $18 dollars a month.



I don't think this is targeted towards those who only need to store a small amount of data and have very low performance needs. If you are are already spending $500/mo on an RDS instance, then it sounds like this would be a great solution. If you are spending $10/mo on a micro instance for your database server, I don't think this is targeted towards you.


It's not SQL Server, it's SQL Database. There are many large differences between the two.

A 50GB database with 10GB of RAM usage and 2 cores costs 700USD/Mo with SQL Database. This is replicated twice within DC. Double that price if you want georedundancy. Their entry level costs less but is also unusable for most real applications


The google cloud SQL pricing[1] for a comparable specs tier (D32) is 35$/day (~900+) which is way expensive compared to aws db.r3.large

[1] https://cloud.google.com/sql/pricing




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: