Easiest blob storage out there
September 04, 2019

Easiest blob storage out there

Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 10 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User

Overall Satisfaction with Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)

We use Amazon S3 for hosting all of our backups, our Apache Spark output files (in lieu of HDFS), our Snowflake external stages, our static website, etc. Additionally, we migrate our logs there for historical purposes. As far as file storage goes, it is able to meet all of our needs with little-to-no downtime.
  • S3 is very good with uptime
  • S3 is elastic and infinitely scalable
  • S3 is user-friendly
  • S3 is not good if you need to copy files a lot; it can be slow
  • S3 is not a replacement for a file system. It is blob storage, so things like updates and renames are impossible
  • S3 requires globally unique bucket names, which can be a challenge
  • S3 is extremely cheap, and we are able to host our entire data warehouse there.
  • S3 rarely goes down, which is good for things like our static website.
  • S3 can be slow if we need to copy files, but it is nothing terrible.
AWS has provided a very easy-to-use console for all of their products, including S3, which has a simple drag-and-drop interface that walks you through anything you need to do. They also have a very simple command-line utility, and several programmatic interfaces to access all of your data from anywhere and any language.
Amazon Web Services (AWS) has amazing support for all of its products. Their Service Level Agreement (SLA) is to have 99.9% of uptime, and when they are unable to meet that, they will provide the user a credit towards their account. Additionally, they will help you troubleshoot any error messages you encounter from normal use.
S3 is suitable for static websites, Big Data (Spark or Hadoop) file system, in lieu of HDFS, and backups. S3 is not suitable for a file system replacement, frequent updates, or storing files that require renames.