What are the risks of using an on-premises database for database development?

Business requirements keep changing over time. There may be a change which would entail more optimization and increased performance. There may be a push for 100% uptime with business continuity in case of a disaster. On-prem DB also have a fixed cost for the compute. If the workload is low, the compute cannot scale down automatically to save costs vice-versa when the workload increases. Lastly, most workloads run on cloud these days. So if you want to connect an on-prem database to other workloads on the cloud or simply want to take the on-prem data to the cloud for processing with other services, there is an additional cost involved in creating VPNs as the on-prem databases tend to be located behind the corporate firewall.

Of all costs the need for skilled individuals to monitor and maintain the on-prem database makes it a daunting undertaking with little investment returns because the important aspect of the business is to deliver value with regard to the business to their customers. Even with automation, the necessary skillsets are needed to prepare custom scripts and ensure compliance with data protection regulations and security standards.

An on-premises database, in my opinion, can be a major business bottleneck, particularly if you intend to expand internationally. The emergence of data governance regulations such as the CCPA, GDPR, and others may make it very difficult to set up and operate many physical datacenters. Technology ought to be a facilitator rather than a hindrance.

It can get real expensive really quickly especially if you're in the research and testing phase of your application development. This is because acquiring licenses to run on prem stand alone databases could cost quite a bit of money and requires constant maintenance. In the testing phase, you may end up purchasing licenses to databases which you end up not fully utilizing. Lastly, if you consider that you may additionally have to acquire specialized expertise for every database type, manually secure your physical database servers and ensure a reasonable uptime; the costs add up.

Any on-premise service, not only databases, requires someone to maintain it, keeping an eye on hardware, OS, dependent services, etc. So in my experience, there lies the main risk, you need knowledge, someone to do this job and always be prepared to quickly reproduce the service in case of a fatal hardware failure.

There is nothing as painful as losing the trust of your customer due to downtime caused by unexpected demand which in essence should be good for the business. That's where the power of cloud databases with some having scalability and performance out of the box without the need of complex configurations.

I completely agree that on-premises databases pose significant challenges when it comes to scalability and performance. Dealing with limited capacity and configuration can lead to unexpected issues like slow queries, data loss, or system crashes, causing disruptions and frustration for the organization. Cloud-based databases, in contrast, offer automatic scalability, allowing seamless adjustment to changing data volumes and workloads. This flexibility ensures faster and more reliable data access, enhancing development productivity, quality, and ultimately, customer satisfaction. Considering these factors, I would strongly advocate for cloud solutions in database development.

In my experience, on-premises database generally lacking the flexibility to support a geographical team, as well as, large system performance testing include load and stress test. For example, it is limited with openness in supporting collaboration between geographical and integration team due to less interconnectivity and interoperability, hence it results in less scalable and may have performance issues. Totally agree with above paragraph with use of cloud-based database platform, which gives many advantages, technically and most likely with less cost in addressing scalability and performance concerns.

Scalability: On-premises databases may face challenges in scaling quickly in response to increased data volume or user demand. Scaling often requires purchasing and installing additional hardware, which can be time-consuming and may lead to delays in meeting business needs. Cloud databases, on the other hand, often offer easier scalability options, allowing organizations to adapt to changing requirements more efficiently. Performance: The performance of on-premises databases can be constrained by the capacity of the local infrastructure. If the workload increases beyond the capacity of the on-premises setup, it may lead to slower response times and decreased efficiency.

Scaling an on-premises database can be challenging and expensive. As your data and user base grow, you may need to physically upgrade hardware to handle increased loads, which can be disruptive and costly. Moreover, performance can be limited by the capabilities of the existing hardware, and scaling up may involve downtime while new hardware is installed and configured.

Based on my experience, on-premises data center security has improved, aided by third-party solutions. However, cloud solutions, especially with AWS services like IAM, KMS, and Security Hub, offer robust security and compliance features. It's crucial to assess the organization's initial setup. If there's an existing investment, maintaining security is feasible. But for additional services, I recommend a cloud-first approach. Starting hybrid and transitioning to fully cloud-based databases gradually optimizes security and investments.

There is also the risk of losing the databases because of improper backup scheduling or not creating disaster recovery that isn’t on premise.

Scalability and Cost One limitation of having an on-premise database is the ability to scale. When memory, disk, or CPU utilization exceeds the point of performance degradation all you can do is throw more hardware at it and scale the server up or perhaps spin up a second server and implement load balancing which can be complex and expensive. Meanwhile, cloud solutions like AWS RDS make it simple to scale up and out and eliminate the need to maintain and upgrade hardware.

While on-premises databases can offer strong security controls, they also require significant effort to maintain security standards and compliance with regulations such as GDPR or HIPAA. The organization is responsible for all aspects of data security, from physical server security to cybersecurity measures, which can be a substantial burden.

on cloud is successful on collaboration but should be aware for security and cost consume when you have many people to do on the share resources.

On-premises databases can limit collaboration and innovation, especially in a geographically dispersed team environment. Access to the database is typically confined to the local network, making it harder for remote teams to work together effectively. This setup can stifle the fast-paced collaborative development that cloud-based solutions support.

Disaster Recovery On-premises databases pose a higher risk in disaster situations. If the physical location suffers from a natural disaster, power failure, or other catastrophic events, data loss can be significant. Implementing robust disaster recovery plans for on-premises setups is usually more complicated and expensive compared to cloud solutions, where data is automatically replicated across multiple locations. Technology Obsolescence With the rapid pace of technological advancement, hardware and software can quickly become obsolete. Regularly updating an on-premises database system to keep up with current technologies. Energy Consumption Running an on-premises database requires considerable energy for power and cooling systems.