AWS Database Migration Service Reviews

We don't use Data Migration Services regularly. We only use it when we need to migrate a relatively large database from on-premises to the cloud. From my point of view, it was the best option in this case.

It provided the ability to create more, less optimized data warehouses. And simplify support and working with data.

It's pretty useful when we need to migrate something big from a different type of database that AWS Data Migration Services supports. But it's more convenient to use Glue if we're dealing with a regular data load, like migrating a table.

Database Migration Service could be more integrated. I think that it makes sense to add integration to these functions. For example, AWS Glue has a feature called Orchestrator to create data flows, and that's more straightforward. But it's not easy to do the same things with Database Migration Service.

Database Migration Service is stable.

I would say Database Migration Service is not expensive. 

I rate AWS Database Migration Service six out of 10. However, if you are considering it, you should get a good idea of what you need. It's useful for some jobs, but you need to know how to use this better. 

We use this program to migrate from SQL to RDS, or from Oracle to RDS, or from Oracle to Aurora and so on.

I find the DNS services to be the most valuable feature.

The pricing can be better and it should be more competitive, so I would like to see an improvement there.

I have been using AWS Database Migration Service for more than ten years now.

The program is very stable.

I was very impressed by the scalability of AWS Database Migration Service. One of our clients has more than 15,000 users.

We don't really use their technical support but I believe the technical team will be able to help with any issues that may arise.

The initial setup was really easy and it took us about an hour to set everything up. We have our own team of about 45 people that was responsible for the implementation. The maintenance of the program is mostly automatic.

It is a very expensive program and you pay a license fee based on the amount of users you have. And besides the license fees, there are additional costs for migration.

It is a good program and I will give it an eight out of ten rating. I would like to see more migration options in the next release. 

We're primarily using the solution to migrate our archive and data, which we are storing in our local servers, to the cloud.

The solution's most valuable feature is its warning of the costs of the migration.

As the solution is on the cloud, we don't have to worry about the maintenance of software.

The administrative aspects of the solution are very good. When we need to, we can increase our speed.

It would be helpful if the bandwidth could be independent of the network or if we could have a dedicated bandwidth for this product.

In terms of dedicated bandwidth, if it can be support Excel or prioritize Excel based on the data it is going to transfer, it would be better.

I've been using the solution for six months.

The solution is quite stable.

The solution is quite scalable. We have more than 100 users currently on the solution.

I've never reached out to technical support.

The initial setup was straightforward. It's easy to deploy and takes about 40 to 45 minutes. It does depend on the server and configuration, however. 

I'm a consultant. We use the public cloud deployment model.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.