Great storage engine for all your AWS needs
Overall Satisfaction with Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)
We are using Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) as our main storage for static files, saved reports, and short and long-term backups. Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) has many different storage types that allow us to optimize our data storage spend quite well, but unfortunately not to the fullest. With the built in web access, and good integration with CloudFront we are also able to serve media to the world with a simple and low-cost solution. Having file-level access control is also a major plus that we utilize often.
Pros
- Long term cost effective storage
- Bucket, folder and file level access control
- Publish files and folders to the web
- Integrate with many other AWS services
Cons
- More storage types would allow for better cost scenarios
- An in-place compression and decompression functionality would be helpful
- A trusted storage for our production data
- Keeps things simple
- Well understood and accepted in the community
We opted for Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) solution as most of our workloads run on AWS and this saves as bandwidth costs. Otherwise the solutions are similar in capabilities for our needs.
Do you think Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) delivers good value for the price?
Yes
Are you happy with Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service)'s feature set?
Yes
Did Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) live up to sales and marketing promises?
Yes
Did implementation of Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) go as expected?
Yes
Would you buy Amazon S3 (Simple Storage Service) again?
Yes
Comments
Please log in to join the conversation