AWS 的 CA 更新 (CA-2019),將會影響與資料庫相關的服務

AWS 要開始使用新的 CA 發各種資料庫相關服務的 SSL endpoint (包括 RDSAuroraDocumentDB),看一下差不多是十多天前的消息,不知道為什麼突然發個緊急通告:「Urgent & Important – Rotate Your Amazon RDS, Aurora, and Amazon DocumentDB (with MongoDB compatibility) Certificates」。

本來的 CA 是 CA-2015,將在 2020 年到期:

March 5, 2020 – The CA-2015 certificates will expire. Applications that use certificate validation but have not been updated will lose connectivity.

所以會有裡面提到的事項要處理,其中前幾天讓新的 CA-2019 變成新機器的預設值,但如果有需要,還是可以選舊的:

January 14, 2020 – Instances created on or after this date will have the new (CA-2019) certificates. You can temporarily revert to the old certificates if necessary.

可以把 拉下來用 openssl x509 -text -in rds-ca-2019-root.pem 看,另外把網址裡的 2019 改成 2015 也可以拉到舊版的。

不過看起來沒有用 X.509 Name Constraints 限制在只有自家 RDS 的網域...

Amazon RDS 推出了 Connection Pool 的產品

Amazon RDS 推出了 Connection Pool 的產品,叫做 Amazon RDS Proxy:「Introducing Amazon RDS Proxy (Preview)」。

目前支援 MySQL (包括了傳統的與 Aurora 版本的):

Amazon RDS Proxy supports Amazon RDS for MySQL and Amazon Aurora with MySQL compatibility, with support for additional RDS database engines coming soon.

定價策略看起來是依照後端資料庫的 vCPU 計算:

Pricing is simple and predictable: you pay per vCPU of the database instance for which the proxy is enabled.

翻了一下價錢頁是 USD$0.015/vCPU (用 us-east-1 的資料),而如果是 t2 系列的機器,最低是以 2 vCPUs 計算,不是照使用比例算:

RDS Proxy pricing correlates to the number of vCPUs of the database instance for which it is enabled, with a minimum charge for 2 vCPUs.

這樣一個 vCPU 一個月大約要 USD$21.6,算起來頗貴的... 如果 SLA 允許的話,用基本的方式 failover 也許就 ok 了...

如果 SLA 真的要追求到這麼高的話,可以在這些區域測試:

Amazon RDS Proxy is available in preview for RDS MySQL and Aurora MySQL in US East (N. Virginia), US East (Ohio), US West (Oregon), EU West (Ireland), and Asia Pacific (Tokyo) regions. Support for RDS PostgreSQL and Aurora PostgreSQL is coming soon.

Amazon Aurora MySQL 5.7 也可以上 Global Database 了

AWSAmazon Aurora MySQL 5.7 版本推出了 Amazon Aurora Global Database:「Aurora Global Database is Now Supported on Amazon Aurora MySQL 5.7」。

看起來 MySQL 系的 Global Database 就是跨區的 master-slave 架構 (所以標榜降低了 read latency,但沒有提到 write latency):

An Amazon Aurora Global Database is a single database that spans multiple AWS regions, enabling low latency global reads and disaster recovery from region-wide outages.

另外可以看到是 1 秒,所以應該是 async replication:

Aurora Global Database replicates writes in the primary region with typical latency of <1 second to secondary regions, for low latency global reads.


In disaster recovery situations, you can promote the secondary region to take full read-write responsibilities in under a minute.


Amazon 又把一個大部門的 Oracle 系統轉移到了 AWS 自家的系統

算是 AWS 的 PR 稿,在老闆對雲的宣示與政治正確下本來就會陸陸續續轉過去...

這次是 Amazon 的 Consumer Business 從 Oracle 的系統換到 AWS 自己的系統:「Migration Complete – Amazon’s Consumer Business Just Turned off its Final Oracle Database」。

原先有 75 PB 的資料與 7500 個 database:

We migrated 75 petabytes of internal data stored in nearly 7,500 Oracle databases to multiple AWS database services including Amazon DynamoDB, Amazon Aurora, Amazon Relational Database Service (RDS), and Amazon Redshift.


Cost Reduction – We reduced our database costs by over 60% on top of the heavily discounted rate we negotiated based on our scale. Customers regularly report cost savings of 90% by switching from Oracle to AWS.

More than 100 teams in Amazon’s Consumer business participated in the migration effort.

然後 latency 的下降其實也只能參考,因為轉移系統的時候也會順便改寫,有多少是因為 AWS 服務本身帶出來,在沒有內部資料看不出來:

Performance Improvements – Latency of our consumer-facing applications was reduced by 40%.


Administrative Overhead – The switch to managed services reduced database admin overhead by 70%.

另外,沒寫的東西比較有趣,像是他們沒有選擇 Athena 而是用 Redshift,看起來像是先轉上去,其他找機會再說...

AWS Cloud 的用法

Hacker News Daily 上看到這則,分享了 AWS (他的前東家,超過八年) 的使用經驗:

除了可以在 Twitter 上看以外,也可以用 Thread reader 直接讀整條 thread,應該也還算清楚:「This is how I use the good parts of @awscloud, while filtering out all the distracting hype.」。

這邊的經驗談主要是在 web 與 app 相關的服務這塊:

有講到 AWS 的業務其實圍繞在 scalability 上發展,但這對 startup 可能反而是扣分,因為暴力法解反而可以大幅簡化架構換得 agile (而讓 startup 存活下來)。

另外從團隊的開發成本來看,這些 scale 的技術增加了開發成本,產生了很多開發上的限制,這些觀點也有點帶到「Premature optimization is the root of all evil」在講的事情:


除了 DynamoDB 的意見不同外 (這邊提到的 DDB),其他的我都可以接受...

RDS 支援 Storage Auto Scaling

Amazon RDS 推出了 Storage Auto Scaling:「Amazon RDS now supports Storage Auto Scaling」。

看起來傳統 RDBMS 類的都支援 (也就是非 Aurora 的這些):

Starting today, Amazon RDS for MariaDB, Amazon RDS for MySQL, Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL, Amazon RDS for SQL Server and Amazon RDS for Oracle support RDS Storage Auto Scaling.

仔細看了一下新聞稿,裡面都只有提到 scale up,沒有提到 scale down,這個功能應該是只會提昇不會下降,所以要注意突然用很多空間,再砍掉後的問題:

RDS Storage Auto Scaling automatically scales storage capacity in response to growing database workloads, with zero downtime.

RDS Storage Auto Scaling continuously monitors actual storage consumption, and scales capacity up automatically when actual utilization approaches provisioned storage capacity.


RDS Storage Auto Scaling is available in all commercial AWS regions except in Asia Pacific (Hong Kong) and AWS GovCloud.

Amazon Aurora with MySQL 5.7 支援 GTID

雖然在 AWS 上服務的 HA 大多都不需要自己管理,但備份機制 (甚至異地備援) 還是要自己規劃,Amazon Aurora with MySQL 的 GTID 功能算是讓這塊多了一個選擇:「Amazon Aurora with MySQL 5.7 Compatibility Supports GTID-Based Replication」。

公告裡面有提到 Aurora 自己的 replication 還是用自己的機制,而非透過 GTID 做的:

This provides complete consistency when using binlog replication between an Aurora database and an external MySQL database. Your replication won’t miss transactions or generate conflicts, even after failover or downtime. (Note that replication within an Aurora cluster doesn't use binlog files, so the GTID feature doesn't apply.)

不過就 Aurora 的架構來說,整個 cluster 比較像是看作一個整體,用 binlog + position 應該是夠用的?也不會有 failover 時的 conflict 問題?不確定用 GTID 的好處會在哪邊,還得再想看看...

Amazon Aurora Global Database

AWSAurora (MySQL) 推出 Amazon Aurora Global Database:「Announcing Amazon Aurora Global Database」。

看起來不是 multi-master (從 secondary region 這個字看),所以寫入的部分還是得送回 primary region 處理:

Aurora Global Database uses storage-based replication with typical latency of less than 1 second, using dedicated infrastructure that leaves your database fully available to serve application workloads. In the unlikely event of a regional degradation or outage, one of the secondary regions can be promoted to full read/write capabilities in less than 1 minute.

應該是單一 endpoint 幫你處理這些雜事...

Amazon Lightsail 也把 RDS 拿出來賣了...

RDS (MySQL) 也被 Amazon Lightsail 包裝出來賣了:「New – Managed Databases for Amazon Lightsail」。

目前支援 MySQL 5.6 與 MySQL 5.7:

We are launching with support for MySQL 5.6 and 5.7, and will add support for PostgreSQL 9.6 and 10 very soon.

然後規格與價位,其中頻寬費用是指不同區時的頻寬 (同一區內的不計費):

Data Transfer – Data transfer to and from Lightsail instances in the same AWS Region does not count against the usage that is included in your plan.

這個服務應該是目前其他 VPS 沒提供的,這樣可以預期其他 VPS 應該也會被迫推出類似的服務?然後 AWS 也會再搬其他的服務出來賣?

Amazon Aurora 支援 Parallel Query 加速

Amazon Aurora 推出了 Parallel Query,可以加速計算速度:「New – Parallel Query for Amazon Aurora」。原理是利用 Aurora 把 storage 層打散的前提,所以有機會透過螞蟻雄兵處理:

官方給的範例可以連到原文去看,可以看到有打開 aurora_pq 與沒打開的效能差異:

15 rows in set (1 min 53.36 sec)
15 rows in set (1 hour 25 min 51.89 sec)

打開後大約是原來的 1/45 時間,提昇超多...

不過還是有些限制,我最在意的就是目前只支援相容於 MySQL 5.6 的版本 (居然不是先支援 5.7):

Engine Support – We are launching with support for MySQL 5.6, and are working on support for MySQL 5.7 and PostgreSQL.

然後沒有多餘費用,只是 i/o cost 可能會增加:

Cost – You can make use of Parallel Query at no extra charge. However, because it makes direct access to storage, there is a possibility that your IO cost will increase.