Hacker News Reader

Comment by ttfkam | Hacker News Reader

Probably means Aurora MySQL. In CloudFormation and other AWS artifacts, "Aurora" is a keyword that regularly comes up meaning MySQL, since that was the original target for Aurora years before the Postgres flavor was released. There are AWS old-timers at my shop that call it Aurora, and it shows up in their YAML.

View on HN

To whomever downvoted, when specifying the AWS::RDS::DBCluster "Engine" property in CloudFormation, aurora = mysql5.6 and below, aurora-mysql = mysql5.7 or mysql8.x, aurora-postgresql = postgres. Since 5.6 was deprecated, the "aurora" engine type was removed the CF docs, but it was there until a few years ago. "Aurora" was synonymous with MySQL for a while.

#AWSHistory

People downvoted because you were assuming that when someone says "we moved to postgres" they would mean "we moved to mysql" as if they wouldn't know what they were talking about.

Even your history thing makes no sense, Aurora Postgres was launched 9 months after Mysql version in July 2015.

Aurora MySQL was released October 2014.

https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/highly-scalable-mysql-compa...

Aurora Postgres hit general availability October 2017. (Sorry, betas and early release offerings don't count.)

https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/now-available-amazon-aurora...

Quick math… carry the two… compute the partial differential equation…

Looks like 3 YEARS between the release of Aurora MySQL and Aurora Postgres.

Yes, if you choose other definitions for launch dates you can come up with many different timespans.

You're right. I should use the GA announcement for Aurora MySQL as well.

…which was November 2015.

https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/now-available-amazon-aurora...

So now tell me, between 7-9 years have gone by since Aurora is a multi database product, what sense does it make to assume its mysql? That's like saying at your company people call AWS "S3" or "SQS" because that's how it started. I don't even know what point you're trying to make because unless the majority of the time was mysql only and then recently other databases would've been added, the anecdote would still not make sense.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37085062

The majority of the time, it was identified as "aurora" in CloudFormation templates. 5.6 hit EOL in February of THIS YEAR, aka 2023.

https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/database/upgrade-amazon-aurora-...

So… that would make it the majority of time, wouldn't it? Why does this upset you so?

Someone disagreeing with you doesn't mean they are upset my friend. Have a good one because we're not going to agree.

> People downvoted because you were assuming that when someone says "we moved to postgres" they would mean "we moved to mysql" as if they wouldn't know what they were talking about.

What? That's not what that comment says at all. They're saying that aurora mysql was a plausible interpretation of what OP moved from, before OP clarified.

Yep, I was wrong about the source DB in retrospect, but that other guy just seems to want to argue with straw men. Takes all kinds, I guess.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com