Batch intermediate files can be regenerated if lost.
No persistent backup is required, and a fast area on the EC2 host is acceptable.
Which choice is most appropriate?
Use instance store for regenerable temporary data while explicitly accepting that the data is lost with the host or instance lifecycle.
Detailed explanation
Instance store is temporary, so its loss behavior is acceptable for regenerable intermediate data.
Instance store is temporary, so its loss behavior is acceptable for regenerable intermediate data.
This adds persistent-storage and backup costs without a recovery requirement.
This adds persistent-storage and backup costs without a recovery requirement.
Archive storage adds complexity and retention cost to data that can be regenerated.
Archive storage adds complexity and retention cost to data that can be regenerated.
DNS is not a file-storage area.
DNS is not a file-storage area.
Check official documentation
Compare the following points with the official documentation.
Amazon EC2 instance storeの公式説明を確認する。
What to confirm
永続性が不要なデータとEBS・Instance Storeを比較できる。
Key points
- Instance store
- Temporary data
- Regenerable data
Notes
- Environment: AWS公式EC2ドキュメントの確認
- Confirm current AWS service behavior and pricing in the official documentation.
Foundation review
Durability trade-off
Instance store can be fast and inexpensive, but its data is not a persistent recovery copy.
EBS versus instance store
EBS persists independently of the host lifecycle; instance store is appropriate only when loss is acceptable.