undefined | Better HN

Skip to content

Top Best Ask Show New Jobs

0 pointsphonon9y ago0 comments

EBS data is backed up in multiple redundant ways (using erasure encoding I think).

Local storage is not intended for permanent storage, and is more use at your own risk. That's also why most of the new EC2 instances don't even support local storage.

Availability =/= durability of course

0 comments

5 comments · 1 top-level

problems9y ago· 4 in thread

EBS is incredibly expensive and slow, not really a good solution. It'd be nice if they offered a better local storage option.

phononOP9y ago

Incredibly expensive and slow compared to what? A 500 GB SSD (gp2) costs $50/m, and has 1500 - 3000 IOPS. It's okay for most loads.

For higher performance, you can use

1. EBS Provisioned IOPS (kind of expensive)

2. Aurora (for DB use)

3. The new I3 instances (super fast local storage at a reasonable price.)

That's the cost of a new 500GB SSD per month! For the cost of three months' EBS storage and a couple of hours you could setup your own RAID array with a spare for backups and possibly get better uptimes than Amazon :P

Dylan168079y ago

> 1500 - 3000 IOPS

So about as many as this SD card, and nothing compared to a real SSD.

I think most people rely on EBS and are happy with it. Sure it depends on the use case, but I think it works for most use cases.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse