Best NAS solution for AWS

[NE1ScottZT]

I was looking into TrueNAS Core 12 to run on and EC2 instance at AWS since I already have in running in a VMware VMC cluster there but cluster replication is bloating my storage numbers really bad so I need to offload it from my cluster.

Will it run on AWS graviton processors ? is 8 cores and 16GB enough ?
When I look at t3.2xlarge the costs obviously go up to about 10K/yr with 7.5TB storage.
Have there been any major problems reported with TrueNAS Core 12 release candidates ? I think I'm running RC2.2

I have file storage I access from win7+ VMs and linux 5.x+ VMs via mounts that is mostly used to work on code or do software builds so the connections are relatively low usage in average throughput. Looking to be very cost effective as the effect over disk over-usage in a VMC cluster is to add a node which puts us in an 8x more expensive support tier.

Another option I am considering is AWS FSx.
An option I don't think with work due to NFS 4.1 requirements in AWS EFS.

Anybody who has already been through this would have very valuable info for me.

 

[Arwen]

@NE1ScottZT - On the subject of AWS graviton processors, short is answer no.

TrueNAS, Core or Scale, is not compiled, tested or packaged for any processor family, except x64. Today, it will not even run on x32.


As for a cloud vendor, you may be disappointed. One of the features of TrueNAS' ZFS is snapshots. These snapshots can take variable amount of space. If you have to pay as space is used, if you get infected with ransomware that encrypts all your files, any preexisting snapshot would cover you. But, it would double your storage requirements.


On the other questions, I don't know.

 

[NE1ScottZT]

Thanks for the response.

I ran the numbers using TrueNAS Core 12.x running on AWS t3.2xlarge and it came to about 10.5K+/yr with the 7.5 TB I have using HDD storage an 100Gbit throughput. The automatic replication and such make me unsure how much more disk I'll need in the coming months.

I found AWS FSx to be more cost effective (if it actually works like it seems) at 100Gbit but at Gigabit speeds it was much closer in cost. Not sure if it will be as user friendly as TrueNAS since AWS is usually NOT user friendly and will inevitably have gotchas.

I suspect if I go to FSx hidden and unforeseen costs will appear and I'll regret using it.