Amazon EFS vs Google Cloud Filestore
Pick EFS when you need POSIX-compliant storage mounted read-write across dozens-to-thousands of EC2/ECS/EKS/Lambda instances at once — shared CMS uploads, or training data mounted by an autoscaling GPU fleet meets developers should use google cloud filestore when building applications on gcp that need a scalable, managed file storage solution with nfs compatibility, such as for hosting website content, supporting containerized applications with persistent storage, or handling data-intensive tasks like machine learning training. Here's our take.
Amazon EFS
Pick EFS when you need POSIX-compliant storage mounted read-write across dozens-to-thousands of EC2/ECS/EKS/Lambda instances at once — shared CMS uploads, or training data mounted by an autoscaling GPU fleet
Amazon EFS
Nice PickPick EFS when you need POSIX-compliant storage mounted read-write across dozens-to-thousands of EC2/ECS/EKS/Lambda instances at once — shared CMS uploads, or training data mounted by an autoscaling GPU fleet
Pros
- +Skip it for Windows-native shares: Azure Files' SMB + Active Directory integration beats EFS's NFS-only model, and for raw HPC throughput, FSx for Lustre or Google Filestore Zonal (up to 26 GiBps, 920K IOPS) outrun EFS's 20-60 GiBps ceiling
- +Related to: amazon-ec2, amazon-eks
Cons
- -Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case
Google Cloud Filestore
Developers should use Google Cloud Filestore when building applications on GCP that need a scalable, managed file storage solution with NFS compatibility, such as for hosting website content, supporting containerized applications with persistent storage, or handling data-intensive tasks like machine learning training
Pros
- +It is particularly useful in scenarios where multiple compute instances must concurrently read and write to the same dataset, eliminating the need for manual storage management and ensuring high availability
- +Related to: google-cloud-platform, nfs
Cons
- -Specific tradeoffs depend on your use case
The Verdict
Use Amazon EFS if: You want skip it for windows-native shares: azure files' smb + active directory integration beats efs's nfs-only model, and for raw hpc throughput, fsx for lustre or google filestore zonal (up to 26 gibps, 920k iops) outrun efs's 20-60 gibps ceiling and can live with specific tradeoffs depend on your use case.
Use Google Cloud Filestore if: You prioritize it is particularly useful in scenarios where multiple compute instances must concurrently read and write to the same dataset, eliminating the need for manual storage management and ensuring high availability over what Amazon EFS offers.
Pick EFS when you need POSIX-compliant storage mounted read-write across dozens-to-thousands of EC2/ECS/EKS/Lambda instances at once — shared CMS uploads, or training data mounted by an autoscaling GPU fleet
Disagree with our pick? nice@nicepick.dev