Amazon EFS vs Google 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 filestore when building applications on gcp that need shared file storage with low latency and high throughput, such as for web hosting, machine learning training, or legacy application migration. 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 Filestore
Developers should use Google Filestore when building applications on GCP that need shared file storage with low latency and high throughput, such as for web hosting, machine learning training, or legacy application migration
Pros
- +It is particularly useful for scenarios requiring persistent storage across multiple virtual machine instances or Kubernetes pods, eliminating the need to manage underlying infrastructure
- +Related to: google-cloud-platform, network-file-system
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 Filestore if: You prioritize it is particularly useful for scenarios requiring persistent storage across multiple virtual machine instances or kubernetes pods, eliminating the need to manage underlying infrastructure 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