Amazon S3 vs RocksDB: What are the differences?
Amazon S3: 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; RocksDB: Embeddable persistent key-value store for fast storage, developed and maintained by Facebook Database Engineering Team. RocksDB is an embeddable persistent key-value store for fast storage. RocksDB can also be the foundation for a client-server database but our current focus is on embedded workloads. RocksDB builds on LevelDB to be scalable to run on servers with many CPU cores, to efficiently use fast storage, to support IO-bound, in-memory and write-once workloads, and to be flexible to allow for innovation.
Amazon S3 can be classified as a tool in the "Cloud Storage" category, while RocksDB is grouped under "Databases".
Some of the features offered by Amazon S3 are:
- 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.
On the other hand, RocksDB provides the following key features:
- Designed for application servers wanting to store up to a few terabytes of data on locally attached Flash drives or in RAM
- Optimized for storing small to medium size key-values on fast storage -- flash devices or in-memory
- Scales linearly with number of CPUs so that it works well on ARM processors
"Reliable" is the primary reason why developers consider Amazon S3 over the competitors, whereas "Very fast" was stated as the key factor in picking RocksDB.
RocksDB is an open source tool with 14.3K GitHub stars and 3.12K GitHub forks. Here's a link to RocksDB's open source repository on GitHub.
According to the StackShare community, Amazon S3 has a broader approval, being mentioned in 3231 company stacks & 1611 developers stacks; compared to RocksDB, which is listed in 6 company stacks and 7 developer stacks.
What is Amazon S3?
What is RocksDB?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions
What are the cons of using RocksDB?
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
Insanely low prices, quite easy to use, and they're fast. Plus they provide great support. And they're integrated with other AWS services, like CloudFront.
Seriously, this is the best service of it's kind out there.
We store the software components that CloudRepo stores for its customers here for the following reasons:
- Data is Encrypted at Rest
- Data is stored across multiple physical locations
- Pricing is competitive
- Reliability is industry leading and our customers need to be able to access their data at all times list text here
In October 2008 we moved to using scribe (now a custom branch), which has served us very well over the past 5+ years that we’ve been using it. We take the logs scribe aggregates and move them into Amazon S3 for storage, which makes using EMR on AWS seamless.
S3 serves as zero-knowledge temporary storage. Files are encrypted in the browser before being uploaded in chunks to S3. When the target recipient downloads them the chunks are reassembled and decrypted in the browser. Files expire after a week and the encrypted chunks are permanently deleted from S3.
Since we generate a static website for our website, AWS S3 provides hosting for us so that we don't have to run our own servers just to serve up static content.
The pricing is great as you only pay for what you use.