<story><title>Heroku Postgres is now based on AWS Aurora</title><url>https://blog.heroku.com/heroku-postgres-essential-launch</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>olau</author><text>A warning about Aurora: It&amp;#x27;s opaque tech. I&amp;#x27;ve been on a project that switched to it by recommendation by the hosting provider, and had to switch away because it turns out that it does not support queries requiring temporary storage, i.e. queries exceeding the memory of the instances.&lt;p&gt;It manifested the way that the Aurora instances would use up their available (meagre) memory, then start thrashing, taking everything down. Apparently the instances did not have access to any temporary local storage. There was no way to fix that, and it took some time to understand. After having read all the little material I could find on Aurora, my personal conclusion is that Aurora is perhaps best thought of as a big hack. I think it&amp;#x27;s likely there are more gotchas like that.&lt;p&gt;We moved the database back to a simple VM on SSD, and Postgres handled everything just fine.</text></comment>
<story><title>Heroku Postgres is now based on AWS Aurora</title><url>https://blog.heroku.com/heroku-postgres-essential-launch</url></story><parent_chain></parent_chain><comment><author>iancarroll</author><text>Having previously been on several managed PostgreSQL providers and now on AWS Aurora -- Aurora has been pretty great in terms of reliability and performance with large row counts and upsert performance.&lt;p&gt;However, Aurora isn&amp;#x27;t cheap and is at least ~80% of our monthly AWS bill. I wonder how it is cheaper than Heroku&amp;#x27;s previous offerings? Is it Aurora Serverless v2 or something like that to reduce cost? Aurora billing is largely around IOPS, and Heroku&amp;#x27;s pricing doesn&amp;#x27;t seem to reflect that.</text></comment>