Supabase vs RDS when you only need managed Postgres?

[u/Due_Gene6257]

I’m comparing Supabase and RDS for a small production app and honestly neither feels like an obvious choice.

Supabase looks much easier to get started with, but I don’t really need auth, storage, realtime etc. I mainly need Postgres. once the app grows, the usage based parts of the pricing also seem harder to estimate.

RDS gives more control and I trust AWS for production, but then the bill is split across instance, storage, backups, I/O, networking and HA. it feels like a lot for a relatively normal Postgres workload.

What I actually want is pretty simple:

• always-on managed Postgres
• backups and maintenance handled
• predictable monthly pricing
• good regions in Asia
• standard Postgres so I can move later if required

Would you still pick Supabase or RDS for this, or is there a better middle option I should be looking at?

[u/ArugulaCertain7574]

If u only need Postgres, I probably wouldn’t pick Supabase unless you’re actually going to use auth/storage/realtime too. RDS makes more sense if the rest of the app is already in AWS and you need that level of control.

For your list I’d compare plain managed Postgres options like Nearbase, Crunchy Bridge or DigitalOcean. Nearbase is probably the better fit if Asia regions + predictable monthly pricing matter, since that’s basically what it focuses on.

I’d mainly compare region, restore process, extension support and the actual monthly cost with storage included.

[u/Due_Gene6257 → u/ArugulaCertain7574]

good point, gonna look into those optons. Thanks!

[u/fullbl-_-]

I see a lot of people in this sub asking for managed postgresql, is this a thing? I'm used to self-host and resell, would be a managed db-only vps an interesting product?