4 ms·
Hi! Unless you need to drive that 100 MB/s continuously, you can use the bursting throughput mode, which means you don't have to separately provision and pay fo
by geertj 5y ago
Hi! Unless you need to drive that 100 MB/s continuously, you can use the bursting throughput mode, which means you don't have to separately provision and pay for throughput.
If you do need to drive 100 MB/s continuously, then Provisioned Throughput at the price that you mention would be appropriate. But note that you get 50 MB/s of throughput included with every TB of storage, and you only pay for the provisioned throughput in excess of what's included in your storage.
- isignal 5y agoThanks for the reply. Relying on bursting for a core service like a db would be too much risk - it would make sense for batch compute or similar workloads. From a systems viewpoint, I can’t understand if there’s an actual technical challenge involved or if this pricing is just a lack of competitive pressure. Is there some corner case about the POSIX guarantees of EFS that makes higher throughput challenging to achieve? (Otherwise one could just spray file blocks across many servers and maintain a metadata mapping of file to blocks to achieve good throughput)
- rmbyrro 5y agoYou should probably not run a database off of EFS. It's not best tailored for the type of concurrent access that DBs will throw at it.