We performed a comparison between Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) and Amazon S3 Glacier based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Public Cloud Storage Services solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution's technical support is good."
"We can run code and deploy it whenever we want."
"I appreciate Amazon's extensive range of services, which makes it a favorable choice."
"We are not that big of a cloud user. We just use it for the storage of our bytes. The most valuable aspect is the storage."
"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The solution is scalable."
"EFS is flexible."
"The most beneficial feature of the product for data storage stems from the fact that it serves as a shared file storage."
"We like that the price is cheaper."
"Amazon S3 Glacier is an easy-to-use solution."
"The solution is stable."
"The reliability of storage is the main benefit."
"The product automatically replicates objects from a S3 bucket in one region to another bucket in a different region."
"The pricing is low, and it's dedicated to archiving is valuable to us."
"The data archive feature is valuable."
"It is a very comprehensive tool."
"Specifically, when it comes to the file system for the learning system, we encountered performance issues with both Azure and AWS."
"When we faced some issues, the support team took a lot of time to resolve them."
"The interface seems strange and complicated."
"The lack of transparency in the costs attached to the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Around 80 percent of the features of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) are available on Linux and not in Windows, making it a major drawback of the product."
"It could be better in connecting with Windows Server instances."
"The user activity needs to be more connected."
"It should be simplified. There are people who don't have cloud experience. It should be storage that we are able to just connect to."
"A couple of times, we faced outage issues that caused us problems."
"The tool could be made cheaper."
"There is room for improvement in handling GDPR compliance better. GDPR is about personal data protection and retention. It would be great if S3 Glacier could handle compliance items related to this, especially with upcoming legislation like the California law, which restricts data storage time and allows users to request data deletion."
"Billing issues can be a nightmare. It's tough reaching the right person to get them sorted out."
"The solution's cost optimization could be improved."
"The product’s pricing must be improved."
"The solution’s deployment process is complex and could be improved."
"The product takes more time to secure data when the bandwidth is low."
More Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is ranked 3rd in Public Cloud Storage Services with 9 reviews while Amazon S3 Glacier is ranked 5th in Public Cloud Storage Services with 34 reviews. Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is rated 8.6, while Amazon S3 Glacier is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) writes "Useful for storing details of projects and has an easy configuration". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Amazon S3 Glacier writes "A cost-effective solution to reduce storage and cost footprint". Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) is most compared with Microsoft Azure File Storage, Google Cloud Storage, NetApp Cloud Volumes ONTAP, Azure NetApp Files and Amazon S3, whereas Amazon S3 Glacier is most compared with Google Cloud Storage Nearline, Google Cloud Storage, Microsoft Azure File Storage, Amazon S3 and Oracle Cloud Archive Storage. See our Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. Amazon S3 Glacier report.
See our list of best Public Cloud Storage Services vendors.
We monitor all Public Cloud Storage Services reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.