4 ms·
What's wrong with EBS? And for what usage?
by grosbisou 13y ago
What's wrong with EBS? And for what usage?
- seldo 13y agohttp://blog.awe.sm/2012/12/18/aws-the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly/#~ozDTEFkXkMAR1E http://blog.awe.sm/2012/12/18/aws-the-good-the-bad-and-the-u... TLDR: it's okay for backups, but in critical path it's a world of sadness. Failure modes are too painful.
- rpedela 13y agoMost of AWS's major outages have been related to EBS. Although outages can happen to any hosting provider, and I am sure they have fixed the previous issues. So EBS should get more stable over time and it is already quite stable. The performance of EBS is pretty bad, and getting decent performance is expensive. Having said that, if your application runs in memory and disk usage is infrequent then it is probably fine to use EBS. EBS is also much more expensive than the instance storage, but it is also durable unlike instance storage. On the whole, "never ever EBS" is too strong language making it incorrect. As usual, it depends.
- mikebabineau 13y agoFrom what I've seen/heard/experienced, Provisioned IOPS largely addressed the issues with inconsistent performance.
- rpedela 13y agoYes but it is very expensive.
- toomuchtodo 13y agoOnly use EBS when you absolutely have to, and fail gracefully when EBS fails.
- copergi 13y agoIt went down in 2012 and somehow rather than get the correct idea from that (everything breaks) people took this bizarre notion that EBS is bad and everything else has perfect reliability. In reality, tons of other AWS services run on top of EBS, including load balancers. When EBS fails again, the people thinking they are avoiding it will still have outages.