You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
description: Compare the price of the mainstream managed MySQL hosting providers
@@ -15,9 +15,10 @@ This post is maintained by Bytebase, an open-source database DevSecOps tool that
15
15
16
16
| Update History | Comment |
17
17
| -------------- | ---------------- |
18
+
| 2026/04/01 | Update PlanetScale. |
18
19
| 2025/04/28 | Initial version. |
19
20
20
-
This concise guide compares pricing across six major MySQL hosting providers: AWS RDS, AWS Aurora, Google Cloud SQL, Azure Database for MySQL, DigitalOcean, and Aiven. Assuming you're familiar with these services, we'll focus on pricing structures, cost comparisons, and recommendations for different use cases.
21
+
This concise guide compares pricing across seven major MySQL hosting providers: AWS RDS, AWS Aurora, Google Cloud SQL, Azure Database for MySQL, DigitalOcean, PlanetScale, and Aiven. Assuming you're familiar with these services, we'll focus on pricing structures, cost comparisons, and recommendations for different use cases.
21
22
22
23
## Pricing Comparison Tables
23
24
@@ -31,8 +32,11 @@ This concise guide compares pricing across six major MySQL hosting providers: AW
| PlanetScale | $39 (1/8 vCPU, 1 GiB) - includes 1 primary and 2 replicas | $179 (1 vCPU, 8 GiB) - includes 1 primary and 2 replicas | $999 (8 vCPU, 32 GiB) - includes 1 primary and 2 replicas | No |
34
36
35
-
_Entry-level options provide the most economical starting point, with Google Cloud SQL and AWS RDS offering the lowest prices. DigitalOcean and Aiven provide more predictable performance at this tier compared to the burstable instances from hyperscalers. Notably, Aiven offers a completely free tier suitable for development._
37
+
_Entry-level options provide the most economical starting point, with Google Cloud SQL and AWS RDS offering the lowest prices. DigitalOcean, PlanetScale, and Aiven provide more predictable performance at this tier compared to the burstable instances from hyperscalers. Notably, Aiven offers a completely free tier suitable for development._
38
+
39
+
_PlanetScale has a locally-attached NVMe offering which has a much better price to performance ratio, but we have chosen not to include it here as the specs aren't directly comparable to their network-attached storage product._
_At the mid-range tier, AWS Aurora is significantly more expensive than other options, while DigitalOcean offers the most economical solution. AWS RDS and Azure provide identical pricing at this tier, making them interchangeable from a pure cost perspective._
49
+
_At the mid-range tier, AWS Aurora is significantly more expensive than other options, while DigitalOcean offers the most economical solution. AWS RDS and Azure provide identical pricing at this tier, making them interchangeable from a pure cost perspective. PlanetScale is among the more expensive tiers at first glance, but their clusters include an HA setup by default with 1 primary and 2 replicas distributed across 3 AZs._
46
50
47
51
### Enterprise-Level Pricing Comparison
48
52
@@ -63,6 +67,8 @@ _The enterprise tier shows the most dramatic pricing differences, with AWS Auror
63
67
| Azure MySQL | Business Critical | $0.25 | Higher performance |
64
68
| DigitalOcean | SSD | Included in plan | Varies by plan |
65
69
| Aiven | SSD | Included in plan | Varies by plan |
70
+
| PlanetScale | General Purpose | $0.50 | Scales with instance |
71
+
| PlanetScale | NVMe | Included | Extreme performance; No IOPS limits |
66
72
67
73
_Storage pricing varies significantly between unbundled (AWS, Google, Azure) and bundled (DigitalOcean, Aiven) approaches. For high-performance workloads, AWS's provisioned IOPS offers the most control but at premium pricing. Google Cloud SQL has the highest SSD pricing, while Aurora offers good value with its distributed storage system._
68
74
@@ -79,6 +85,7 @@ _The chart above shows that Azure Business Critical storage is significantly mor
| PlanetScale | Free | Free | Included | Included |
82
89
83
90
_Network transfer costs become significant for applications with heavy data movement, especially across regions or to the internet. DigitalOcean offers the most economical outbound internet transfer, while Aiven includes all network transfer in their base pricing, eliminating this variable cost component._
84
91
@@ -96,8 +103,9 @@ _The chart above highlights the dramatic difference in outbound internet transfe
96
103
| Azure MySQL | 1.5-2x instance cost | Included for 7-35 days based on tier | Included |
97
104
| DigitalOcean | Additional cost for standby nodes | Included in plan | Included |
98
105
| Aiven | Included in Business/Premium tiers | Included in plan | Included |
106
+
| PlanetScale | Included (1 primary + 2 replicas) | 2x daily backups included | Not available |
99
107
100
-
_High availability configurations significantly impact total cost, effectively doubling the price for most providers except Aurora (which has built-in HA) and Aiven (which includes it in higher tiers). Backup costs are generally included with limitations, with Google Cloud SQL being the only provider to charge after a certain threshold._
108
+
_High availability configurations significantly impact total cost, effectively doubling the price for most providers except Aurora (which has built-in HA) and Aiven (which includes it in higher tiers). PlanetScale MySQL/Vitess clusters come with HA and 3 nodes by default. Backup costs are generally included with limitations, with Google Cloud SQL being the only provider to charge after a certain threshold._
| PlanetScale | Annual commitments | Discounts for consumption and AWS/GCP Marketplace | Custom |
117
126
118
127
_For predictable, stable workloads, commitment-based discounts from major cloud providers offer substantial savings. AWS provides the highest potential discount but with less flexibility than Google's commitment model._
119
128
@@ -126,6 +135,7 @@ _For predictable, stable workloads, commitment-based discounts from major cloud
126
135
| Google Cloud | None (only auto storage scaling) | Full instance cost | N/A |
_For variable or unpredictable workloads, AWS Aurora Serverless offers the most mature consumption-based model, potentially reducing costs during periods of low activity. Azure is developing similar capabilities but with less granularity._
131
141
@@ -138,6 +148,7 @@ _For variable or unpredictable workloads, AWS Aurora Serverless offers the most
138
148
| Azure MySQL | 30+ regions | Strong | 5-25% variation |
_Regional availability directly impacts data sovereignty compliance. The hyperscalers offer the most comprehensive regional coverage, while Aiven leverages underlying cloud providers to offer the widest deployment options with consistent pricing across regions._
143
154
@@ -149,6 +160,7 @@ The MySQL hosting market in 2025 offers diverse pricing models catering to diffe
149
160
2.**Azure** balances feature richness with moderate pricing complexity.
150
161
3.**DigitalOcean** emphasizes simplicity and predictability at the expense of some flexibility.
151
162
4.**Aiven** offers multi-cloud flexibility with straightforward pricing but at a premium for higher tiers.
163
+
5.**PlanetScale** starts at a higher price, but includes high availability by default and offers better price to performance options with locally-attached NVMe.
152
164
153
165
## References
154
166
@@ -160,6 +172,7 @@ The MySQL hosting market in 2025 offers diverse pricing models catering to diffe
160
172
1.[Azure Database for MySQL Pricing](https://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/details/mysql/)
description: Compare the price of the mainstream managed PostgreSQL hosting providers
@@ -15,11 +15,12 @@ This post is maintained by Bytebase, an open-source database DevSecOps tool that
15
15
16
16
| Update History | Comment |
17
17
| -------------- | ---------------- |
18
+
| 2026/04/01 | Add PlanetScale Postgres. |
18
19
| 2025/05/06 | Initial version. |
19
20
20
21
PostgreSQL remains a top choice for relational databases in 2025 due to its reliability, extensibility, and active open-source community. With many hosting options available, choosing the right provider is key to balancing performance, scalability, and cost.
21
22
22
-
This article compares PostgreSQL hosting solutions from major clouds (AWS, GCP, Azure) and specialized providers (DigitalOcean, Aiven, Neon, Supabase, Timescale, Heroku), focusing on pricing models and key cost factors to help you make an informed decision.
23
+
This article compares PostgreSQL hosting solutions from major clouds (AWS, GCP, Azure) and specialized providers (DigitalOcean, Aiven, Neon, PlanetScale, Supabase, Timescale, Heroku), focusing on pricing models and key cost factors to help you make an informed decision.
23
24
24
25
## Understanding Pricing Models
25
26
@@ -47,6 +48,7 @@ Most providers mix these models, with key cost factors including compute, storag
- 🆓 **Free Tier**: ❌ No, but startup credits available case-by-case
171
+
158
172
### Supabase
159
173
160
174
Supabase positions itself as an open-source Firebase alternative, providing a suite of backend tools, including a dedicated PostgreSQL database for each project.
@@ -190,6 +204,6 @@ Heroku Postgres is one of the original and well-known managed PostgreSQL service
190
204
191
205
## Conclusion
192
206
193
-
In 2025, PostgreSQL hosting ranges from flexible cloud platforms (AWS, GCP, Azure) to simple, developer-focused options (Neon, Supabase, Aiven, etc.).
207
+
In 2025, PostgreSQL hosting ranges from flexible cloud platforms (AWS, GCP, Azure) to simple, developer-focused options (Neon, PlanetScale, Supabase, Aiven, etc.).
194
208
195
209
Cloud providers offer power and scale, but with complex pricing. Specialized hosts are easier to use, often with free tiers and clear pricing. Match your choice to workload needs, budget, and team expertise. Start small, test with free plans, and scale as needed.
0 commit comments