Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Amazon EBS vs Google Cloud Storage: What are the differences?
Amazon EBS: Block level storage volumes for use with Amazon EC2 instances. Amazon EBS volumes are network-attached, and persist independently from the life of an instance. Amazon EBS provides highly available, highly reliable, predictable storage volumes that can be attached to a running Amazon EC2 instance and exposed as a device within the instance. Amazon EBS is particularly suited for applications that require a database, file system, or access to raw block level storage; Google Cloud Storage: Durable and highly available object storage service. Google Cloud Storage allows world-wide storing and retrieval of any amount of data and at any time. It provides a simple programming interface which enables developers to take advantage of Google's own reliable and fast networking infrastructure to perform data operations in a secure and cost effective manner. If expansion needs arise, developers can benefit from the scalability provided by Google's infrastructure.
Amazon EBS and Google Cloud Storage belong to "Cloud Storage" category of the tech stack.
Some of the features offered by Amazon EBS are:
- Amazon EBS allows you to create storage volumes from 1 GB to 1 TB that can be mounted as devices by Amazon EC2 instances. Multiple volumes can be mounted to the same instance.
- Amazon EBS enables you to provision a specific level of I/O performance if desired, by choosing a Provisioned IOPS volume. This allows you to predictably scale to thousands of IOPS per Amazon EC2 instance.
- Storage volumes behave like raw, unformatted block devices, with user supplied device names and a block device interface. You can create a file system on top of Amazon EBS volumes, or use them in any other way you would use a block device (like a hard drive).
On the other hand, Google Cloud Storage provides the following key features:
- High Capacity and Scalability
- Strong Data Consistency
- Google Developers Console Projects
"Point-in-time snapshots" is the primary reason why developers consider Amazon EBS over the competitors, whereas "Scalable" was stated as the key factor in picking Google Cloud Storage.
Accenture, Evernote, and Teleport are some of the popular companies that use Google Cloud Storage, whereas Amazon EBS is used by Airbnb, Medium, and Instacart. Google Cloud Storage has a broader approval, being mentioned in 183 company stacks & 79 developers stacks; compared to Amazon EBS, which is listed in 179 company stacks and 47 developer stacks.
So, I was working on a launcher for a few FNaF: Security Breach mods and I needed a place to host it's files and the mods. The launcher was about 70MB, one mod was 80MB and the other one 400MB.
Now, here's my issue: GCS was expensive as sh*t. In a single week it ate up one third of the free trial. Sure, I did host old versions for the sake of having a backup but honestly those prices were too high.
That simply isn't an issue with Spaces. They provide predictable costs and the host is just good. It does the job perfectly fine.
We choose Backblaze B2 because it makes more sense for storing static assets.
We admire Backblaze's customer service & transparency, plus, we trust them to maintain fair business practices - including not raising prices in the future.
Lower storage costs means we can keep more data for longer, and lower bandwidth means cache misses don't cost a ton.
We offer our customer HIPAA compliant storage. After analyzing the market, we decided to go with Google Storage. The Nodejs API is ok, still not ES6 and can be very confusing to use. For each new customer, we created a different bucket so they can have individual data and not have to worry about data loss. After 1000+ customers we started seeing many problems with the creation of new buckets, with saving or retrieving a new file. Many false positive: the Promise returned ok, but in reality, it failed.
That's why we switched to S3 that just works.