Yes, good point with the loss of storage-cost savings when block-writing out the storage. An alternative to using the bursting is obviously the provisioned mode, which.. at 1MBps provisioned per month costs equate to $6.00/mo.
A more reasonable cost estimate would be 20GB of data, stored in EFS standard storage with 5MBps provisioned throughput would cost $30.00/mo. This would still cost less than rolling-your-own on EC2 and ensuring distribution in an ASG.
Been using UNIX since the late 80s; Linux since the mid-90s; virtualization since the early 2000s and spent the past few years working in the cloud space.
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Education
B.S. Psychology from Pennsylvania State University
Also, thanks for both the original post and engaging on my comment. So many times, it seems like the people I converse with haven't done much in the way of meaningful exercises when it comes to performance, hosting-costs or (especially) life-cycle evaluations. Even most of the cloud-oriented people I come in contact seem to only be consumers of container services rather delving into the joys of cloud or cross-cloud enablement end of things.
Been using UNIX since the late 80s; Linux since the mid-90s; virtualization since the early 2000s and spent the past few years working in the cloud space.
Location
Alexandria, VA, USA
Education
B.S. Psychology from Pennsylvania State University
Part of what drove us to EFS alternatives was that the automation I was writing was meant to cover deploying a DevOps tool-chain solution (GitLab, Jenkins, etc.) into both regular AWS commercial and regions where EFS wasn't even available (nor the more-recent, managed-Lustre offering).
Artifact of that was seeing markedly improved responsiveness (particularly in GitLab). When back-testing in a commercial region, we had to pre-allocate a significantly-larger chunk of EFS To get similar performance to a small Gluster cluster.
Never had the time to do a full "cost vs. responsiveness" test. Would have been interesting, but, until the GovCloud region(s) support EFS, would mostly have been an academic, rather than practical, effort.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Yes, good point with the loss of storage-cost savings when block-writing out the storage. An alternative to using the bursting is obviously the provisioned mode, which.. at 1MBps provisioned per month costs equate to $6.00/mo.
A more reasonable cost estimate would be 20GB of data, stored in EFS standard storage with 5MBps provisioned throughput would cost $30.00/mo. This would still cost less than rolling-your-own on EC2 and ensuring distribution in an ASG.
Also, thanks for both the original post and engaging on my comment. So many times, it seems like the people I converse with haven't done much in the way of meaningful exercises when it comes to performance, hosting-costs or (especially) life-cycle evaluations. Even most of the cloud-oriented people I come in contact seem to only be consumers of container services rather delving into the joys of cloud or cross-cloud enablement end of things.
Likewise! Thanks for the input and expertise. 👍
Part of what drove us to EFS alternatives was that the automation I was writing was meant to cover deploying a DevOps tool-chain solution (GitLab, Jenkins, etc.) into both regular AWS commercial and regions where EFS wasn't even available (nor the more-recent, managed-Lustre offering).
Artifact of that was seeing markedly improved responsiveness (particularly in GitLab). When back-testing in a commercial region, we had to pre-allocate a significantly-larger chunk of EFS To get similar performance to a small Gluster cluster.
Never had the time to do a full "cost vs. responsiveness" test. Would have been interesting, but, until the GovCloud region(s) support EFS, would mostly have been an academic, rather than practical, effort.