2 ms·
It's NFS, so the bad latency isn't surprising. The problem is that they don't have anything faster -- it tops out at 2GBy/s or something, even with hundreds of
by angry_octet 7y ago
It's NFS, so the bad latency isn't surprising. The problem is that they don't have anything faster -- it tops out at 2GBy/s or something, even with hundreds of TB, even with multiple clients. You have to share your data over multiple EFS volumes, or build your own virtual gluster, which are extremely shit options. Also makes any kind of bug data HPC impractical.
Bezos, if you're listening, fire someone. You should have next generation pNFS or lustre like protocols by 2016.
- sciurus 7y agoThey actually do have https://aws.amazon.com/fsx/lustre/ https://aws.amazon.com/fsx/lustre/ Latency of EFS is much worse than running your own NFS in my experience.
- angry_octet 7y agoDoh, how did I not find that? But also, how does the pricing work? It seems to be half the price of EFS? It almost seems like that are assuing S3 read or Direct Connect to populate the FSx volume.