Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store) Reviews

We keep the data generated by the applications in the solution. We also store application logs. It is very easy to integrate the tool with the EC2 instance. I use the AWS console to integrate the products. Sometimes, I use CLI.

When the data is created, we save it in EBS. It's data-intensive, and sometimes, the data is very important. To avoid losing the data, we create a snapshot of the volumes every hour or once every two hours. We select volumes like gp2 and gp3 based on our requirements. EBS is customizable. We can select any volume depending on speed and size. The integration is very easy. We can mount EBS within seconds. We can also delete or unmount it.

It also provides API support. The durability and snapshot capabilities are good. The way they are designed is very good. We rarely find our EBS corrupted. It's very robust and easy to use. I never faced any issues with durability. The maximum size is 1000 GB. The solution is available whenever we need it.

The features could be improved.

I have been using the solution for five to seven years.

I rate the tool’s stability a ten out of ten.

I rate the tool’s scalability a ten out of ten.

We need to pay for support.

Negative

Integrating EBS into EC2 is very easy. Even people who are not from technical backgrounds can do it.

The solution is quite costly. There was an instance when we were not using 50 volumes. They were available and were costing us even though we were not using them. We ran a script to delete them. It's better to keep a watch on it and delete it whenever it is not needed. AWS has a pay-as-you-go model.

We have been using the solution since we have deployed our applications on AWS. If we track 100 GB of EBS volume, we know that the total data collected from the application will not cross 100 GB. Sometimes, we use Amazon S3 for object storage. If there is any transit data, we store it directly in S3. Our EBS volumes are free most of the time.

Logs mostly fill the EBS volumes quickly. We have an instance to monitor our Kubernetes cluster, and it fills the EBS volume very quickly. So, we have written a script to delete the older logs. I will recommend the solution to others. Anyone using EC2 must use EBS by default. It's very easy to use and integrate. Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

I use Amazon EBS in two instances. Firstly, I run a startup where our workloads are on the cloud, so we leverage AWS services. 

Secondly, I help customers who use AWS cloud since I work as an authorized instructor with AWS authorized training partners.

Amazon EBS has improved versions and frequently releases new features and different families while selecting compute resources. A valuable feature is the ability to create snapshots and reuse them across different instances. If an instance is terminated abruptly or accidentally, I can reattach the volume to a different instance. This functionality adds great flexibility and reliability.

There is a challenge of intermittent reachability with instances, where the product is sometimes available and other times not, which affects the development environment's stability. Manual resizing of storage capacity is required, which could be simplified. 

Additionally, instances running on Debian experienced more intermittent failures compared to those running on CentOS.

I have been using EBS for about a year.

Besides the challenge of intermittent failure of instances, which is not directly an EBS issue, the stability is generally acceptable.

EBS can scale, but the process is somewhat manual compared to serverless options. 

Overall, the scalability is sufficient but requires manual intervention for adjustments.

I primarily use community support through Slack and have found answers there. However, when a customer faced an issue with creating an AWS account, contacting support took a while, and the response lacked detail.

Positive

The initial setup requires some prior knowledge about instances and server configurations. Deployment and configuration require foundational understanding before properly setting up the servers.

Amazon EBS is perfectly serving its purpose, and I absolutely recommend it to others. 

I would rate it nine out of ten.

We use dev tools. We had our own server for product development. For the dev environment, we use it for database servers as well as to share files between our teams. We also use EFS, like file storage. These were the primary uses cases for us. 

One of the most valuable was snapshots. There were scenarios in which the whole EC2 crashed, or we were unable to use it for some time, but the data on the mounted volumes were crucial to us. So, at that time, snapshots were very helpful.

There is room for improvement in terms of file storage. Recently, we had a scenario in which, in a file share, we had increased the IOPS capacity; this was for the production environment. We had previously done that, but for some reason, it went down. We weren't able to access that specific drive or volume. So, because it was production, it impacted our clients also.

We had an AWS support call. Basically, they also did the same steps which we were requiring. We had requested them to decrease the IOPS capacity and make the volume available so that at least the customer impact would be reduced, but we had to wait around, like, more than 300 GBs. So, for volume recovery, we had to wait around eight hours. That took major downtime. So, it was just a small task; we had done it for increasing dial-ups, but we were not sure what went wrong, and even AWS didn't have an answer. So we had to wait a full eight hours for this to be available from the snapshot, and then we were able to attach it again. That was a major downtime or an area on which AWS could improve.

I had been consulting for a project, so it was close to two years since I started using this solution. We were working with EC2 and Block storage.

I would rate the stability a seven out of ten. We had some scenarios. Because if we were using some lower-tier offering, that might be integrated into architecture and lead to failures. But we used a specialized tool. 

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. It is good, but there's room for improvement in terms of troubleshooting.

There are around 200 end users using this solution in our organization. We don't give access directly; it's indirectly through dev and test roles. They all use our EBS.

The setup is a bit easy. If someone is from a cloud background with basic domain knowledge of how most speakers work or the hard drives that work on a local machine, they would be able to put two and two together, like, "Oh, these volumes are like hot-swaps for us."

Our deployment model is on a private cloud. We also have a public offering, but that is just an endpoint that we share with the customers. Currently, we are using AWS for our product development.

The pricing seems affordable compared to what other offerings provide.

I would say start with the basics. The free tier offers 50 GB, so you could make use of that and then go forward with it. If you want to set up disaster recovery or a standby setup, you could make use of that. 

If you prefer not to rely solely on AWS, you can create an S3 bucket to store the snapshots. Then, you can access these snapshots in a different region to reduce costs. This is something we've observed. If you don't want to opt for a multi-AZ snapshot, it might incur additional expenses. However, by storing the snapshot in S3 and accessing it from another region, you can replicate the snapshot. It serves as a workaround.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I use the solution in my company to store Amazon EC2 instances.

There are no specific features of the product that I like the most since it is a tool that serves as a block storage in my company.

I feel that there are some concerns when it comes to the accessibility area of the product where improvements are required. The product should be accessible for any kind of main service. For better accessibility, users can choose Amazon NFS over Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store). Amazon NFS can be used for multiple services. Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store) can be used for a single point of service.

I have been using Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store) for four to five years. I am a customer of Amazon.

The product can handle an increase in the load of user data. The product can handle an increase in demand.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

The product's initial setup phase was easy to manage.

The time required to declare the solution depends on the user's chosen services.

The product offers different pricing models. The pricing models may be for general purposes, such as Amazon EBS Provisioned IOPS Volume or Amazon EBS Cold HDD Volumes. The volume size can be considered while checking the costs attached to the product. Coming to the general purpose, our company checks for bandwidth performance since it will be used for a wide range of workloads. Amazon EBS Provisioned IOPS Volume will be for intensive workloads.

I have integrated Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store) with Amazon EC2. Amazon EC2 deals with instances, but Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store) is required to deal with the storage part.

I utilize the product for data-intensive applications and to deal with Amazon EC2 instances, and the company has connected it with Amazon EBS volumes. Once any instances are created with the help of Amazon EC2, our company has to attach them to Amazon EBS volumes, which we can use to create Amazon EBS snapshots.

The scalability of Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store) has affected our company's storage solutions since it provides auto-scaling feature recording. With the tool's auto-scaling feature, our company has to create EC2 storage and instances. The product allows our company to extend its capacity by at least 70 percent, and if it needs to be increased beyond that, then it will automatically create a new service and attach it to a new Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store) service.

Speaking about the durability and snapshot capabilities, with the auto-scaling features provided by the product, our company can add Amazon EC2 instances as a part of Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store).

I recommend some services, like Amazon RDS, which allows users to use Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store) volumes. With Amazon S3, users can use Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store) volumes.

Amazon EBS (Elastic Block Store) can be used in multiple regions with multiple integrations or two-way communications. The product also offers customization options.

My company uses multiple tools and services from AWS. My company manages and creates different services. Our organization deploys applications and manages clusters on Amazon's services. If our company's customers face issues, we have to offer help.

I recommend the product to those who plan to use it since it helps encrypt data. Users can also choose the encryption volume with the help of the product. AWS Key Management Service is available for encryption purposes.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

During my internship, I used Amazon EBS for a small business portfolio where we had an e-commerce website locally. I utilized Amazon EBS as the storage solution for the EC2 servers we were using at that time.

The most impressive aspects of Amazon EBS are its scalability and high availability. These features make it easy to adjust resources up or down according to the requirements.

I am still in the learning process regarding Amazon EBS, so I'm not entirely sure what specific improvements are needed. It has been good enough for my current learning and usage.

The last time I used Amazon EBS was about two months ago, during my internship.

Amazon EBS is indeed stable, and I would rate its stability as quite high.

Scalability is impressive and allows for easy scaling of resources up or down.

I had an experience where I needed to contact Amazon's customer service. They were available even at two AM, demonstrating a cooperative environment. This support was surprising and positive.

Positive

My clients had been using other services that were more expensive before switching to AWS. Switching reduced their budget, as AWS offers a pay-for-what-you-use model with transparency and no hidden charges.

The setup of Amazon EBS is easy to use.

In terms of pricing, Amazon EBS is not expensive. The pay-for-what-you-use model justifies the amount paid, with no extra or hidden charges.

I would rate Amazon EBS a nine out of ten overall. There is always room for improvement in every aspect, which is why I did not give it a full ten.

In my company, we use Amazon EBS whenever there are cases involving our servers having low space or there is some migration of servers required. We also deal with Amazon EFS often, but now we have an NFS tool for support. I use EFS very less since NFS is already present in the current products we deal now.

I provide updates from Amazon to my clients. If a client has Ubuntu Server that has EBS, and if the storage has less space, I directly connect my AWS account to add and increase the storage capacity of my client's servers, resolving the client's problems.

Every company is required to have its own servers, which means that every server requires storage. The need for storage depends on two kinds of storage, including Amazon EBS, which is a primary kind of storage. The file server or file systems and managing the objects inside require Amazon EBS as it is an important tool for day-to-day operations.

The most valuable feature of the solution is backup. If we deal with a gaming company client, then such a company requires a high IO throughput, which will give them only Amazon EBS instead of storage, including NAS, NFS, and similar tools. Since Amazon EBS is a good product, we deal with highly critical and hospitality-oriented tools, like RDBMS, for high-end data fetching from customers with high throughput.

Amazon EBS is a single product or service. 

I have a couple of issues related to Amazon EBS from the clients regarding the use of space, which have not been resolved. If a customer increases from one TB to two TB and wants to go back to needing one TB instead of two TB, then there is a long process involved to do so currently, even though going from one TB to two TB was very easy. Returning back to one TB from two TB or reducing the space is a problem in Amazon EBS, like S3. S3 is a scalable tool, meaning that you can increase or decrease its size. In Amazon EBS, it is difficult to reduce the space chosen by the customer. The cost increases the moment the size of the storage increases, and I will have to pay for two TB of the tool instead of one TB. If my clients want to change something in the tool, they need to get approval from their company, making it a long process. It would be better if Amazon EBS had the same features as S3 since we could easily revert back to one TB from two TB easily, which is not possible right now.

If I place Amazon EBS in South Asia, there will be an increase and decrease in terms of costs. Cost optimization is one challenge I have faced since placing Amazon EBS is the reason why basic costing is applicable. S3 is very cheap compared to Amazon EBS, and because of this, some clients request S3 and not Amazon EBS.

Depending on the requirements of my clients, I may want extra features in the product's future releases. Scalability is very important for our company since the tool's availability is already there. Most often, we use the product's scalability feature apart from the security feature. Amazon KMS, along with CRM, is a feature we deal with in our company, areas where we face issues due to low latency. If I want access to data in ESB, then it is dependent on the encryption method which I allocate in Amazon EBS.

I have experience with Amazon EBS for more than seven years. I am a customer of the solution who works in the service area of helping my company's customers deal with the issues arising from the use of the solution. I am a service provider involved in research and development activities for automation. I get direct service from Amazon for the version of the tool I use.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

As of now, I deal with three customers, and those three customers are different kinds of services for which they want to deploy Amazon EBS in their environments. My company caters to around nearly fifty endpoints.

My company's clients consist of one medium-sized business and two small businesses.

I can't give a full rating to the support since they are sometimes late to respond to my issues. I rate the technical support as an eight out of ten.

Positive

I have experience with storage services from AWS.

I rate the initial setup a nine on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy. The setup phase is very easy.

The solution is deployed on AWS cloud.

The time taken for the deployment depends on the size and the customers' requirements, so it can be deployed in less than an hour.

We implement everything as a backup recovery or DR tool. Sometimes, Amazon EBS is required, along with DR. When there are two branches and one of them says that the other has to work simultaneously are scenarios where the deployment can take time. It might take 24 hours to deploy the solution since the two replicas simultaneously work together.

Price is a big challenge for Amazon EBS. The price of the product is the reason why Azure is gaining popularity in the market.

On a scale of one to ten, where one is low price, and ten is high, I rate the price a seven.

The addition of networking solutions is an additional cost in Amazon EBS. If the process or storage capacity is increased in the product, the cost also increases.

Amazon EBS is a very good product since it is very easy to enhance or increase and migrate your servers immediately, in a matter of seconds. Sometimes, we require a critical server to take backups from images for which we use a snapshot. EBS is a kind of hardware for keeping a separate drive in our box. We can connect to Amazon EBS directly whenever required, after which we can simply clean up the server. Amazon EBS helps in different kinds of scenarios, like backup, storage increase, and migration of the servers, and such related support is offered in the solution's services.

Google has started offering some bundle kinds of products. If features offered by Kubernetes are made available in Amazon EBS, then it would be great. The bundle from Google can help if I want to implement a game product. In Amazon EBS, if a bundle similar to the one offered by Google is made available at a lesser price, then it would be good. Nowadays, there are instant requirements from our customers for which you can set up everything. Offering simple services in a bundle can be a good idea.

The product has been in the market for more than ten years, and to date, the customers are dependent on the solution.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

I use Amazon EC2 instances, AWS Lambda, API Gateway, and EBS for storing data. EBS is primarily associated with Amazon EC2 instances.

The main advantage is the ability to scale up and scale down easily without any downtime. Amazon EBS allows seamless changes to the instance type without affecting application availability. 

It also supports encryption by default for added security.

I do not have anything in mind for improvement at the moment.

I have been using Amazon EBS for around eight years.

Amazon EBS is stable and easy to use. Detaching and attaching volumes are very straightforward, contributing to the overall stability.

Amazon EBS provides effective scalability with the ability to modify volume size easily and have it reflect instantly.

Accessing technical support requires a paid subscription plan. Once subscribed, the support team is very responsive, connecting remotely to assist with troubleshooting.

Positive

Amazon EBS is priced based on usage, and it is fairly priced. Users are charged only for the data used, not for the allocated volume.

I recommend using EBS because of its flexibility with volumes. Instead of instance-based storage, EBS is more efficient.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

When it comes to development environments, we have some applications that we deploy from those volumes. Sometimes, we use them for backups mainly due to limitations.  

So there are some clients who listen to set up that kind of structure in one availability zone.  

One of the examples I can use is what we have in our department, which we deploy in EDS. But this one, already far, when it comes to workload, if you have those clusters in high volume or workload, we tend to use provision ISPs. But we use those that are regularly accessed for general purposes.

The most important feature is the volume types in those hundred EDS. For example, if you need a volume with high IOPS, you should choose an io2 or io2 Block Express volume type. The default volume type for EBS is GP3, which is a good balance of performance and price for most workloads.

It is hard to access EBS volumes in different Availability Zones (AZs) because most EBS volumes are created in a single AZ. This can be a problem for workloads that require high availability or performance.

I would recommend that Amazon improve the accessibility of EBS volumes across AZs. This could be done by making it easier to create EBS volumes in multiple AZs or by providing a way to automatically replicate EBS volumes across AZs.

Currently, if you want to get the ability to access EBS volumes in different AZs, you need to use a different service.

I have been using this solution for two years. The companies I've worked for have used EBS volumes internally. However, they have since reduced the number of EBS volumes they use. They now mainly use Amazon Simple Storage Service (S3) buckets for their storage needs.

The exact version of EBS depends on the client, but it varies. Some prefer at least, while others depend on the client's requirements. Some engineers choose not to use a general purpose. Some clients request us to come up with a comprehensive policy where they can be changed automatically or replaced performance-wise, and when it comes to the high-performance aspects.

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. The stability of the solution is good. 

Scalability is good. I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. 

Sometimes the support is a little bit complicated. When it comes to support, since you can access it via one AZ, it gives you a lot of tasks to handle. 

Neutral

The setup is straightforward when it comes to the cloud. It's not so hard at all.

You just need to do as long as you know how to mark them and how to create snapshots to help the other vendors be able to access that particular EBS volume.

There is an ROI. 

The price is okay and fair. Especially if you go for general purpose because it requires low latency accessibility.

I would suggest that if a new company is not very busy, particularly if it's in the setup phase, it's okay to opt for something like EBS. This is because it is a cost-effective solution. You might not need to rush into overly complicated solutions, especially for additional storage. Therefore, if you have a limited budget, and especially if you're aiming to acquire the essentials, it's better to consider EBS. This holds true for me, especially if I'm making a recommendation.

Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten.