Ten times more expensive than S3? There will be a nice market for software which migrates infrequently-used data.
Amazon twangs its Elastic File System at on-premises filer rivals
Amazon has made its Elastic File System (EFS) available, opening up an assault on on-premises filers. EFS was first announced at the AWS summit in April last year with a preview coming later that year. It’s now available as a fully-managed service. Customers can make a few click choices in the AWS Management Console to have …
COMMENTS
-
-
Thursday 30th June 2016 12:46 GMT batfastad
Good!
Having shared and managed persistent file storage available to ephemeral EC2 instances has been needed for a while. I always ended up hacking together EC2 NFS servers but having the scalability handled by someone else is great. We've been using it in preview for almost a year and it's been very solid.
-
-
Thursday 30th June 2016 19:42 GMT InsaneGeek
What??? Cheaper than filers?
"For sure, it will look cheaper than on-premises filers"
No for sure EFS is *more* expensive than on-premises filers. 100TB of EFS storage having the same 4x year lifespan as an on-premise filer.
$0.30 * 48 months * 100TB = $1.440 million dollars, pretty sure you can get 100TB of EMC, NetApp, etc NAS storage, put it in a datacenter pay for power/cooling and an admin for much less.