Get Advice Icon

Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

Amazon S3

53.6K
40K
+ 1
2K
Memcached

7.9K
5.6K
+ 1
473
Add tool

Amazon S3 vs Memcached: What are the differences?

Amazon S3 and Memcached are both popular tools used in web development, but they have key differences that set them apart. Here are the main differences between Amazon S3 and Memcached:

  1. Scalability: Amazon S3 is a highly scalable storage service that allows for infinite storage capacity. It can handle large amounts of data and is designed to handle high traffic loads. On the other hand, Memcached is an in-memory caching system that is primarily used for speeding up database-driven websites. While it can also handle a significant amount of data, its scalability is limited by the available memory on the server it is running on.

  2. Data Persistence: Amazon S3 is a fully durable storage service, meaning that once data is written to S3, it is highly resilient and durable even in the event of hardware failures. It provides automatic backup and replication mechanisms to ensure data durability. In contrast, Memcached is an in-memory caching system and does not provide built-in mechanisms for data persistence. If the server running Memcached were to fail, the cached data would be lost.

  3. Data Access: Amazon S3 provides RESTful APIs to access and manipulate data stored in it. This makes it easy to integrate with various applications and services. Also, S3 can be accessed from anywhere with an internet connection. On the other hand, Memcached does not provide a RESTful interface. Instead, it provides a simple key-value interface based on the Memcached protocol. It is typically accessed locally or within a network, making it more suited for caching data within a single application or server.

  4. Data Retrieval Speed: Amazon S3 is optimized for storing and retrieving large files and can handle a high throughput of data requests. However, it may have higher latency compared to Memcached when it comes to retrieving small, frequently accessed data, as S3 has to perform disk operations to retrieve the data. In contrast, Memcached is an in-memory cache and can provide very low latency for retrieving frequently accessed data, making it ideal for improving website performance.

  5. Cost Model: Amazon S3 follows a pay-as-you-go pricing model, where users are charged for the amount of data stored and the bandwidth used for data transfers. This allows for flexibility and cost control based on actual usage. On the other hand, Memcached is an open-source software and does not have any direct costs associated with it. However, the cost of deploying and maintaining the servers running Memcached needs to be considered.

  6. Use Cases: Amazon S3 is commonly used for storing and serving static files, hosting websites, backup and restore, and large-scale data analytics. It is preferred for scenarios that require durability, availability, scalability, and high throughput. Memcached, on the other hand, is primarily used for caching frequently accessed data to improve website performance. It is suited for scenarios where low-latency data access is critical, such as session management, database query caching, and dynamic content generation.

In summary, Amazon S3 is a highly scalable and durable storage service optimized for large-scale data storage and retrieval, while Memcached is an in-memory caching system focused on improving website performance by caching frequently accessed data. The choice between the two depends on the specific use case and requirements of the application or website.

Advice on Amazon S3 and Memcached

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.

See more
Replies (2)
Michira Griffins
Software Developer at Codeshares Ltd · | 1 upvotes · 125.4K views

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

See more
Recommends
on
Cloudways Cloudways

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.

See more
Decisions about Amazon S3 and Memcached

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.

See more
Gabriel Pa

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.

See more
Manage your open source components, licenses, and vulnerabilities
Learn More
Pros of Amazon S3
Pros of Memcached
  • 590
    Reliable
  • 492
    Scalable
  • 456
    Cheap
  • 329
    Simple & easy
  • 83
    Many sdks
  • 30
    Logical
  • 13
    Easy Setup
  • 11
    REST API
  • 11
    1000+ POPs
  • 6
    Secure
  • 4
    Easy
  • 4
    Plug and play
  • 3
    Web UI for uploading files
  • 2
    Faster on response
  • 2
    Flexible
  • 2
    GDPR ready
  • 1
    Easy to use
  • 1
    Plug-gable
  • 1
    Easy integration with CloudFront
  • 139
    Fast object cache
  • 129
    High-performance
  • 91
    Stable
  • 65
    Mature
  • 33
    Distributed caching system
  • 11
    Improved response time and throughput
  • 3
    Great for caching HTML
  • 2
    Putta

Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions

Cons of Amazon S3
Cons of Memcached
  • 7
    Permissions take some time to get right
  • 6
    Requires a credit card
  • 6
    Takes time/work to organize buckets & folders properly
  • 3
    Complex to set up
  • 2
    Only caches simple types

Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions

6.8K
50.7K
3
23
5.2K
- No public GitHub repository available -

What is Amazon S3?

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

What is Memcached?

Memcached is an in-memory key-value store for small chunks of arbitrary data (strings, objects) from results of database calls, API calls, or page rendering.

Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

What companies use Amazon S3?
What companies use Memcached?
Manage your open source components, licenses, and vulnerabilities
Learn More

Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions

What tools integrate with Amazon S3?
What tools integrate with Memcached?

Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions

What are some alternatives to Amazon S3 and Memcached?
Amazon Glacier
In order to keep costs low, Amazon Glacier is optimized for data that is infrequently accessed and for which retrieval times of several hours are suitable. With Amazon Glacier, customers can reliably store large or small amounts of data for as little as $0.01 per gigabyte per month, a significant savings compared to on-premises solutions.
Amazon EBS
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.
Amazon EC2
It is a web service that provides resizable compute capacity in the cloud. It is designed to make web-scale computing easier for developers.
Google Drive
Keep photos, stories, designs, drawings, recordings, videos, and more. Your first 15 GB of storage are free with a Google Account. Your files in Drive can be reached from any smartphone, tablet, or computer.
Microsoft Azure
Azure is an open and flexible cloud platform that enables you to quickly build, deploy and manage applications across a global network of Microsoft-managed datacenters. You can build applications using any language, tool or framework. And you can integrate your public cloud applications with your existing IT environment.
See all alternatives