

Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) and Azure Data Lake Storage compete in cloud storage solutions. Azure Data Lake Storage seems to have the upper hand with its advanced features despite having higher costs.
Features: Amazon EFS offers ease of integration, scalability, and competitive pricing. Azure Data Lake Storage provides advanced data analytics capabilities, seamless integration with other Azure services, and better long-term scalability.
Room for Improvement: Amazon EFS can improve performance optimization, security features, and documentation. Azure Data Lake Storage needs better documentation, easier setup processes, and clearer user guidelines.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Amazon EFS deployment is straightforward with commendable customer service. Azure Data Lake Storage deployment is more complex but benefits from robust customer support once set up.
Pricing and ROI: Amazon EFS is highlighted for competitive pricing and good ROI with lower initial setup costs. Azure Data Lake Storage has higher initial costs but offers greater ROI through advanced features and scalability.
While the time to respond was good, the time to resolve was not optimal, as it took more than a week.
Amazon's support model is consistent across services.
Training and support depend on the plan you have, with centralized support being very helpful in case issues arise.
The support team is very supportive, and most issues are resolved quickly once we get in touch with them.
A good support experience is marked by the speed of reply and the relevancy of resolution tips.
You can't expect her to know everything about Azure, but she knows who does know, so things can get handled by who knows about the topic the best, and that's usually the best way to handle anything anyway.
Its auto-scaling feature is a crucial point, providing high scalability that I would rate at ten out of ten.
Elastic File Systems allow me to scale up or down easily.
It is very cost-effective, and there's no need for initial charges.
If you have a lot of cross-region needs, then you might have to do more work because it doesn't natively store data in various regions; you have to pick a region.
For performance and scalability, we have never faced any issues even though we handle at least a TB of data every day without any performance problems.
For scalability, I rate Data Lake Storage around eight to nine on a scale of one to ten.
Amazon EFS is extremely stable, as it is managed by AWS.
While I experienced an EFS mount dropping, it was related to server issues rather than EFS itself.
Stability is rated around eight to nine out of ten.
I find the stability of Azure Data Lake Storage to be excellent and would rate it as an eight out of ten.
Database-type workloads do not run properly on Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) because at the end of the day, it is a network file system and requests must travel from one place to another and then return.
Enabling AI-driven or automatic features would be beneficial for new or nontechnical users.
In my project, there are challenges related to AWS, such as ensuring proper security measures with IMS code and encryption.
Currently, migration is only one-way possible, and it would be beneficial if this aspect could be improved.
Compliance departments and IT departments love that type of feature, so people will blanket enable that, but then that racks up tons of bills because it's reading massive files constantly that should be excluded from that type of scan because it's not a type of file capable of having malware; it's the backend database.
With the emergence of AI technology, it would be convenient for storing vector indexes, essential for AI solutions.
EFS could cost around $30 to $50 per month for similar usage.
Amazon EFS is more costly compared to other storage options available from AWS.
Elastic File Systems can be expensive due to the nature of data transfer costs.
Both are the cheapest compared to Palantir and everything else.
The pricing for Data Lake Storage depends on several factors, like the configuration for multiple or single locations and if it uses geo-redundancy storage, which is beneficial but consumes higher costs.
Azure Data Lake Storage is cheaper and provides three options for data storage tiers.
Its ease of integration with other AWS services enhances our infrastructure, while the shared storage access improves reliability and processing continuity for our applications.
They help me process data while maintaining low latency, which is crucial for efficient data processing.
The most valuable feature of Amazon EFS is its auto-scaling capability.
Data Lake Storage can interact with any other Azure resources, providing seamless integration and connectivity.
Allows for automated configuration of data operations such as deletion and transfer between repositories.
It's essentially the blob storage but with more features that are analytics focused because usually that's what people are going to do with the Data Lake, which is ingest data for analytics.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| Azure Data Lake Storage | 1.6% |
| Amazon EFS (Elastic File System) | 3.2% |
| Other | 95.2% |

| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 6 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 4 |
| Large Enterprise | 8 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 7 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 7 |
| Large Enterprise | 12 |
Amazon EFS provides elastic file storage in the cloud, offering unlimited storage and seamless integration with AWS services for dynamic workloads.
Amazon EFS serves as a scalable, shareable file storage across Linux servers, seamlessly integrating with AWS for data-intensive applications. Its auto-scaling capability handles shifting data demands in real time, ensuring cost-effective storage management. Offering high availability and support for NFS version 4, Amazon EFS optimizes performance and data integrity for cloud and serverless environments. While its strengths lie in scalability and Linux support, further enhancements in cost transparency, Windows compatibility, and deployment simplicity can broaden its applicability.
What are the key features of Amazon EFS?Amazon EFS is widely implemented in industries needing robust cloud-based storage solutions, facilitating scalable storage for applications like web serving, content management, and data analytics. Its compatibility with EC2 and Linux optimizes resource management, supporting complex access needs and enhancing operational efficiency in technology-focused sectors.
Azure Data Lake Storage is widely used for data warehousing, storing processed data, raw customer files, and integrating data from multiple sources, supporting analytics, reporting, and machine learning by securely storing JSON, CSV, and other formats.
Organizations use Azure Data Lake Storage to aggregate information for reporting, integrate it into data pipelines, and benefit from secure transfer capabilities. It serves data scientists as a staging area and businesses leverage its Big Data capabilities for developing technological solutions. With strong security features, high scalability, hierarchical namespace for better performance, and efficient data partitioning, it integrates seamlessly with tools like Databricks. Supporting structured, unstructured, and semi-structured data, it is ideally suited for data lakes.
What are the key features of Azure Data Lake Storage?Azure Data Lake Storage finds its application in several industries by enabling technological solutions that leverage its Big Data capabilities. For instance, businesses in finance use it for aggregating financial reports, while retail companies leverage it for customer data analytics. Healthcare industries use it to store and analyze patient data securely. The manufacturing sector benefits by integrating data from different sources to optimize production processes.
We monitor all Cloud Storage reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.