First off, EFS is a type of storage where multiple EC2 instances can access the same files at the same time. Think of it as a shared folder that everyone can use. On the other hand, S3 is used for storing large amounts of data like backups, videos, or documents. It's not for sharing between instances directly, but for holding data safely.
Now, if you need a solution where several EC2 instances need to work together on files, go for EFS. But, if you're looking to store big chunks of data that you don’t need to access constantly, S3 is the better choice.
When it comes to accessing them, with EFS, you mount it as a file system on your EC2 instance, kind of like adding an external hard drive to your computer. With S3, you use API calls, which means you interact with it over the internet to upload or download files.
Performance-wise, EFS is really fast for frequent file operations, giving you low-latency access. But, S3 is more about handling large files and might feel a bit slower with smaller ones.
Talking about costs, EFS tends to be a bit more expensive since it's designed for shared access with extra features like higher throughput. S3, however, is generally cheaper and you only pay for the storage and the requests you make.
So, in a nutshell, if you need a shared file system for EC2 instances, go with EFS. If you’re just storing large static data for the long term, S3 is a great option.
You can use EFS in these situations:
-
When you need a shared file system between multiple EC2 instances.
-
This is for applications that require a traditional file system with low-latency access.
-
When your workloads need high availability, as EFS automatically scales across availability zones.
You can use S3 in these situations:
-
When storing large volumes of static content (images, videos, backups).
-
This is for big data analytics, archival, or backup storage.
-
If you need to store data in a highly durable, scalable, and cost-effective way with access via APIs.
