Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Amazon ElastiCache vs Amazon S3: What are the differences?
Developers describe Amazon ElastiCache as "Deploy, operate, and scale an in-memory cache in the cloud". ElastiCache improves the performance of web applications by allowing you to retrieve information from fast, managed, in-memory caches, instead of relying entirely on slower disk-based databases. ElastiCache supports Memcached and Redis. On the other hand, Amazon S3 is detailed as "Store and retrieve any amount of data, at any time, from anywhere on the web". Amazon Simple Storage Service provides a fully redundant data storage infrastructure for storing and retrieving any amount of data, at any time, from anywhere on the web.
Amazon ElastiCache belongs to "Managed Memcache" category of the tech stack, while Amazon S3 can be primarily classified under "Cloud Storage".
Some of the features offered by Amazon ElastiCache are:
- Support for two engines: Memcached and Redis
- Ease of management via the AWS Management Console. With a few clicks you can configure and launch instances for the engine you wish to use.
- Compatibility with the specific engine protocol. This means most of the client libraries will work with the respective engines they were built for - no additional changes or tweaking required.
On the other hand, Amazon S3 provides the following key features:
- Write, read, and delete objects containing from 1 byte to 5 terabytes of data each. The number of objects you can store is unlimited.
- Each object is stored in a bucket and retrieved via a unique, developer-assigned key.
- A bucket can be stored in one of several Regions. You can choose a Region to optimize for latency, minimize costs, or address regulatory requirements. Amazon S3 is currently available in the US Standard, US West (Oregon), US West (Northern California), EU (Ireland), Asia Pacific (Singapore), Asia Pacific (Tokyo), Asia Pacific (Sydney), South America (Sao Paulo), and GovCloud (US) Regions. The US Standard Region automatically routes requests to facilities in Northern Virginia or the Pacific Northwest using network maps.
"Redis" is the primary reason why developers consider Amazon ElastiCache over the competitors, whereas "Reliable" was stated as the key factor in picking Amazon S3.
Airbnb, Spotify, and Netflix are some of the popular companies that use Amazon S3, whereas Amazon ElastiCache is used by Airbnb, Instacart, and Asana. Amazon S3 has a broader approval, being mentioned in 3231 company stacks & 1611 developers stacks; compared to Amazon ElastiCache, which is listed in 349 company stacks and 79 developer stacks.
Hello! I have a mobile app with nearly 100k MAU, and I want to add a cloud file storage service to my app.
My app will allow users to store their image, video, and audio files and retrieve them to their device when necessary.
I have already decided to use PHP & Laravel as my backend, and I use Contabo VPS. Now, I need an object storage service for my app, and my options are:
Amazon S3 : It sounds to me like the best option but the most expensive. Closest to my users (MENA Region) for other services, I will have to go to Europe. Not sure how important this is?
DigitalOcean Spaces : Seems like my best option for price/service, but I am still not sure
Wasabi: the best price (6 USD/MONTH/TB) and free bandwidth, but I am not sure if it fits my needs as I want to allow my users to preview audio and video files. They don't recommend their service for streaming videos.
Backblaze B2 Cloud Storage: Good price but not sure about them.
There is also the self-hosted s3 compatible option, but I am not sure about that.
Any thoughts will be helpful. Also, if you think I should post in a different sub, please tell me.
Hello Mohammad, I am using : Cloudways >> AWS >> Bahrain for last 2 years. This is best I consider out of my 10 year research on Laravel hosting.
If pricing is the issue i'd suggest you use digital ocean, but if its not use amazon was digital oceans API is s3 compatible
Minio is a free and open source object storage system. It can be self-hosted and is S3 compatible. During the early stage it would save cost and allow us to move to a different object storage when we scale up. It is also fast and easy to set up. This is very useful during development since it can be run on localhost.
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.
Pros of Amazon ElastiCache
- Backed by amazon26
Pros of Amazon S3
- Simple & easy329
- Many sdks83
- Easy Setup13
- 1000+ POPs11
- REST API11
- Plug and play4
- Web UI for uploading files3
- Faster on response2
- GDPR ready2
- Easy integration with CloudFront1
- Easy to use1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Amazon ElastiCache
Cons of Amazon S3
- Permissions take some time to get right7
- Takes time/work to organize buckets & folders properly6
- Requires a credit card5
- Complex to set up3