Softwr

Database & Data Management · head to head

Amazon Aurora vs Firestore

Amazon Aurora logo

Amazon Aurora

Database & Data Management

MySQL and PostgreSQL-compatible relational database built for the cloud

From
Free
Rated
-
Firestore logo

Firestore

Database & Data Management

Flexible, scalable NoSQL cloud database from Firebase

From
Free
Rated
-

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Amazon Aurora aurora requires AWS ecosystem knowledge and integration with other AWS services; Firestore the no-cost Spark plan caps Standard edition at 50,000 document reads, 20,000 writes and 20,000 deletes per day
  • They diverge on capability: Amazon Aurora covers MySQL/PostgreSQL Compatible, Firestore covers Document Model.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Amazon Aurora and Firestore actually diverge.

Attributes where Amazon Aurora and Firestore differ
AttributeAmazon AuroraFirestore
Pricing modelusage-basedfreemium
PlatformsAWS CloudWeb, Ios, Android, Flutter
Founded20062011

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Database & Data Management).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Amazon Aurora

  • MySQL/PostgreSQL Compatible
  • 5x MySQL Performance
  • Auto-scaling Storage
  • Global Database
  • Serverless v2
  • Multi-master
  • Fault Tolerant
  • AWS Lambda

Only in Firestore

  • Document Model
  • Real-time Updates
  • Offline Support
  • ACID Transactions
  • Expressive Queries
  • Multi-region
  • Security Rules
  • Firebase Auth

Both cover

  • Web support

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Amazon Aurora

  • Transaction processingnot Firestore
  • Data storagenot Firestore
  • Application backendnot Firestore
  • Reportingnot Firestore
  • Data analyticsnot Firestore

Firestore

  • Storing structured application data with realtime listenersnot Amazon Aurora
  • Backing mobile and web apps with a serverless document databasenot Amazon Aurora
  • Building offline first apps that sync when connectivity returnsnot Amazon Aurora

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Amazon Aurora

  • Aurora requires AWS ecosystem knowledge and integration with other AWS services
  • Pricing can become expensive with high-traffic applications using many read replicas
  • Limited support for non-relational data types compared to NoSQL alternatives

Firestore

  • The no-cost Spark plan caps Standard edition at 50,000 document reads, 20,000 writes and 20,000 deletes per day
  • The Spark plan caps storage at 1 GiB and network egress at 10 GiB per month
  • Charging is per document read, so a query returning many documents bills for every one of them
  • Going beyond the free thresholds requires the pay as you go Blaze plan billed at Google Cloud rates with no fixed monthly ceiling

Pricing, plan by plan

Amazon Aurora

Free
  • Serverless v2$0.12/hour
    • Auto-scaling
    • Pay per ACU
    • Instant scaling
  • Provisioned$29/month
    • Dedicated instances
    • Predictable performance
    • Reserved capacity

Firestore

Free
  • SparkFree
    • 1GB storage
    • 50K reads/day
    • 20K writes/day
  • BlazeFree
    • Pay as you go
    • Unlimited operations
    • Multi-region

Which should you pick?

Choose Amazon Aurora if

  • You need mysql/postgresql compatible.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on AWS Cloud.
  • You also want 5x mysql performance.

Choose Firestore if

  • You need document model.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Web, Ios, Android, Flutter.
  • You also want real-time updates.

Questions people ask

Is Amazon Aurora or Firestore better?
Neither clearly leads. Amazon Aurora starts at Free and Firestore at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Amazon Aurora or Firestore?
Amazon Aurora starts at Free and Firestore at Free.
Does Amazon Aurora or Firestore run on more platforms?
Amazon Aurora runs on AWS Cloud. Firestore runs on Web, Ios, Android, Flutter.
Can I use Amazon Aurora for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Amazon Aurora best used for?
Amazon Aurora is most often used for transaction processing, data storage, application backend, reporting. Of those, transaction processing and data storage are not what Firestore is typically brought in for.
What can Amazon Aurora do that Firestore cannot?
Amazon Aurora covers MySQL/PostgreSQL Compatible, 5x MySQL Performance, Auto-scaling Storage, Global Database. Firestore covers Document Model, Real-time Updates, Offline Support, ACID Transactions. Both handle Web support.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Amazon Aurora: Is Amazon Aurora compatible with MySQL and PostgreSQL?

Yes, Amazon Aurora offers MySQL and PostgreSQL compatibility with full compatibility to their open-source counterparts, allowing you to migrate existing databases with standard tools.

Source
Amazon Aurora: What uptime SLA does Amazon Aurora provide?

Aurora is designed for up to 99.99% single-region uptime and 99.999% multi-region uptime with automatic failover.

Source
Amazon Aurora: How much does Amazon Aurora cost?

Aurora uses serverless, usage-based pricing where you pay only for consumed capacity. Typical pricing ranges from $50-70 per month for minimal setups to $400-600 per month for small production clusters.

Source
Amazon Aurora: Can Amazon Aurora scale automatically?

Yes, Aurora automatically scales to match workload demands without performance degradation, supporting both read and write scaling.

Source
Amazon Aurora: How many read replicas does Aurora support?

Aurora supports up to 15 low-latency read replicas for distributing read traffic across your application.

Source

Related pages

Other head to heads