Subscribe / Unsubscribe Enewsletters | Login | Register

Pencil Banner

Deep dive on AWS vs. Azure vs. Google cloud storage options

Brandon Butler | April 26, 2017
Comparing block, object and file storage across the three providers.

file storage aws azure google rightscale
Rightscale

Google does not have a native file storage offering, but instead offers the open source FUSE adapter, which allows users to mount files from Google Cloud Storage buckets and converts them into a file system. Google claims this provides the highest throughput of the three providers with 180MBps on reads and 120MBps on writes. But, Adler said in his experience the FUSE adapter is not as well integrated into Google’s cloud platform compared to the other two offerings, leading to potentially frustrating user experiences with it. Adler also notes that AWS’s EFS does not have a native backup solution, while Azure does. AWS encourages EFS users to rely on third-party backup tools at this point.

Azure and Google offer lower prices for their file storage systems compared to AWS: Azure is $0.80 per GB/month, and Google is $0.20, but Adler says those costs do not take into account any replication or transfer charges. While AWS’s base price may seem higher, when taking into account all that it factors in related to scaling, it could be a wash between the three providers.

 

Previous Page  1  2  3  4 

Sign up for CIO Asia eNewsletters.