Managed database vs. your own server: the real total cost
The monthly rate is the first thing people compare and almost always the thing that matters least.
A managed database (RDS, Azure SQL, and the like) takes backups, patching, and high availability off your plate, but it charges you for that convenience. Your own server can come out cheaper on hardware and more expensive on everything else. The only useful comparison is total cost, including your people's time and the risk of an outage.
01 What you see: the monthly rate
The managed option usually looks more expensive per instance. This is where a lot of people stop comparing, and that is exactly why they get it wrong.
02 What you do not see: operations
Patching, backups, monitoring, failover, and the sleepless nights. On your own server you pay for that in your team's hours or in a scare.
A critical outage: thousands of USD/hour
03 When your own server wins
Large, stable, predictable workloads with a team able to run them tend to come out cheaper on your own or reserved server.
04 When the managed option wins
Small teams, variable workloads, or when you do not want anyone awake at 3am because of a backup. Convenience has a price, and sometimes it is worth paying.
// A typical case (illustrative)
Picture a managed database at USD 2,500 a month against your own server at USD 1,400 plus half a DBA. If that half DBA costs USD 1,800 a month, your own server is no longer cheaper. Change the numbers and the answer changes; that is why you calculate it rather than assume it.
Illustrative example with typical market figures, not a specific client.
// next step
We build the total-cost comparison with your real numbers, without nudging you in any direction.