Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 17, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon EFS (Elastic File Sy...
Ranking in Cloud Storage
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
File and Object Storage (9th)
NetApp Cloud Volumes Servic...
Ranking in Cloud Storage
16th
Average Rating
9.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Migration (14th), Public Cloud Storage Services (19th)
 

Featured Reviews

Shailesh Tripathi - PeerSpot reviewer
Mar 6, 2024
Useful for storing details of projects and has an easy configuration
The solution is useful for storing details of our internal projects The solution is pretty interesting. It is a very useful product for engineering. That is why we chose it. We can run code and deploy it whenever we want. I understand the configuration. The integration of EFS with other AWS…
CC
Aug 16, 2021
Enables us to fine-tune storage and capacity on the fly as our needs grow or shrink over time
NetApp delivers High Availability. It's critical to our work. That was the main driver for using NetApp. We have a highly resilient service and if you have a highly resilient service, you are only as resilient as the least resilient part of your infrastructure. That's what we were having trouble with our file system before. It was becoming troublesome, so we needed to find something that was much more highly resilient so that's why we moved to NetApp. The complexity of moving large numbers of files to the cloud depends on what you're trying to do. But for us, it was really simple. I imagine for large enterprise customers it is probably pretty tricky. They're probably on all different technologies inside a large corporation and they may or may not have very large pipes going to them. So if you're in a data center to the cloud then it's going to be easy, but if you have hundreds of branches like if you're a bank and have lots of branch banks, they might have very small pipes out to the internet. It might take forever. In our use case everything's brand new files, so it was pretty trivial. We didn't migrate to the cloud, we were already on the cloud, so it was a nonissue for us. NetApp enables us to share data across VMs. It actually reduced the amount of data storage we need. We were having to have storage attached to each VM. And now we can aggregate that storage across multiple VMs, so that actually gave us a net reduction, which was a good thing. We switched from using block storage to file storage to share data between our VMs. It made it easier, frankly but I worry about the scalability in the future. For the moment it made life easier. We were using block and then we moved back to file with NetApp.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The initial setup was straightforward."
"The first valuable thing is it is scalable."
"I appreciate Amazon's extensive range of services, which makes it a favorable choice."
"The solution is scalable."
"The product's initial setup phase is easy, as per the configurations."
"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 solution's technical support is good."
"The platform is highly scalable."
"High availability is very important to us because we have a production environment. High availability is the highest priority for us to continue keeping our systems running."
"Storage was taking up maybe 10 to 20% of my life at the startup, and now it takes up zero. I was personally running all the infrastructure for the company. Now that we've moved to NetApp, I don't have to worry about making sure it's up and running. It's made my life personally much better."
"In terms of its storage snapshot efficiencies, the service is highly efficient. We are only doing things in small batches right now because we have not converted all of the data, but we have tested them in the Google Cloud and they work efficiently."
 

Cons

"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."
"It could be better in connecting with Windows Server instances."
"Its deployment process could be faster while installing the Python package directly into the environment."
"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."
"The deployment is definitely not an easy process."
"The lack of transparency in the costs attached to the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"Specifically, when it comes to the file system for the learning system, we encountered performance issues with both Azure and AWS."
"The user activity needs to be more connected."
"The user interface has room for improvement. We would like this service to be more integrated with Azure, which is very easy to manage and use. It was easy to create volumes and add capacity pools in Azure, but in Google Cloud, we can only create separate volumes. We need more management or configuration options in the user interface."
"I would like for the sales team to get in contact more often and let me know what I should be doing next, what we should be doing about new features. So it would be nice if I heard a little bit more from him. From a technology perspective, I have no complaints."
"It would help if they increased the area in which they employ artificial intelligence, by starting to do assessments on the environments, to project those. They're not using any AI tools, currently, on the administrative side."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the pricing 7 out of 10."
"The product's price depends on the services and the size and capacity at which it is used in a business environment."
"The solution's price is mid-ranged."
"Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) offers a pay-as-you-go model, so whenever you use its services, you need to pay."
"It has flexible pricing. You are charged based on your storage."
"The product charges are based on the amount of data stored."
"We don't need so much space, and there is no option to pay as we go or use just what we need. Also, the only way to increase performance is by increasing the level of the service."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Storage solutions are best for your needs.
814,763 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Educational Organization
58%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Which file storage system is better - Amazon EFS (elastic file storage) or Azure File Storage?
Amazon EFS is easy to set up: you can use the AWS management console, API, or command-line. Amazon EFS can grow to petabytes and deliver consistent low latencies and high levels of throughput. This...
What do you like most about Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)?
The product's initial setup phase is easy, as per the configurations.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon EFS (Elastic File System)?
The product charges are based on the amount of data stored, with different hot and cold storage costs. Cold storage is inexpensive but slower to access.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
CVS for Google Cloud, NetApp CVS for Google Cloud, Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud, Cloud Volumes Service for GCP, NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for GCP
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Arcesium, Atlassian, Seeking Alpha, Zend
Atos, Bandwidth, Wuxi NextCode
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) vs. NetApp Cloud Volumes Service for Google Cloud and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
814,763 professionals have used our research since 2012.