在AWS的S3或EFS中何处存储数千个图像？

Question

I will make a project in the not too distant future, a project where we will be storing thousands of thousands of images in the course of time. I'm on a hard decision whether to use Amazon S3 or EFS to store those images. Both I think are a very good option, but my question goes to what would be the best service or what would be the best practice?

My application will be done with Laravel and I already did the integration of both services.

Most of the characteristics of the project are:

• Most of the files I will store will be photos about 95%.
• Approximately 1.5k photos would be stored daily.
• The photos are very large (professional cameras).
• Traffic to the application will not be much, approx. 100 users at a time.
• Each user would consult about 100 photos per day.

What dou you recommend?

Answer 1

S3 is absolutely the right answer and practice. I have built numerous applications like you describe, some with 100s of millions of images, and S3 is superior. It also allows for flexibility such as your API returning the images as pre-signed URLs which will reduce load to your servers, images can be linked directly via static web hosting, and it provides lifecycle policies to archive less used data. Additionally, further integration with other AWS services is easy using event triggers.

As for storing/uploading, S3 multi-part upload is very useful to both increase performance and increase reliability.

EFS would make sense for your type of scenario if you were doing some intensive processing where you had a cluster of severs that needed lower latency with a shared file system - think HPC. EFS would also come at a higher cost and doesn't provide as many extensibility options or built-in features as S3. Your scenario doesn't sound like it requires EFS.

http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/WebsiteHosting.html

http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/ShareObjectPreSignedURL.html

http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/object-lifecycle-mgmt.html

http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/NotificationHowTo.html

http://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/mpuoverview.html

Answer 2

For the scenario you proposed AWS S3 is the choice. Why?

• Since images are more often added, it costs roughly 1/10 th of EFS.
• Less overhead on your web servers since files can be directly uploaded and downloaded with S3.
• You can leverage event driven processing with Lambda eg Generating thumbnail, Image processing filters by S3 Lambda trigger.
• Higher level of SLA for availability and durability.
• Supporting for inbuilt lifecycle management to archival and reduce cost.

AWS EFS can also be an option if it happens to frequently modify the images (Where EBS is also an option)

You can also consider using AWS CloudFront with either the option to cache images.

Note: At the end its not about using a single service. Based on your upcoming requrements you can choose either one of them or both.