Amazon Newest Service – Zocalo – Secure Document and File Storage

Amazon Zocalo

“Amazon Zocalo is a fully managed, secure enterprise storage and sharing service with strong administrative controls and feedback capabilities that improve user productivity. Users can comment on files, send them to others for feedback, and upload new versions without having to resort to emailing multiple versions of their files as attachments. Users can take advantage of these capabilities wherever they are, using the device of their choice, including PCs, Macs, and tablets. Amazon Zocalo offers IT administrators the option of integrating with existing corporate directories, flexible sharing policies, audit logs, and control of the location where data is stored.”

They are offering a free trial for 30 days, 200 GB and 50 users.

Features include

  • Single console for all files
  • Commenting on files
  • Sending files to others for feedback
  • Uploading new versions without emailing files as attachments
  • Teammates can leave comments by highlighting a section of a file, or specific text, and typing feedback
  • Users can set optional deadlines for feedback
  • Track files that are out for review
  • Be notified by email when they have been asked to provide feedback
  • Automatic version control
  • Overlay technology that displays all comments from all users
  • Automatically sync files across all the users devices using encryption at rest and in transit
  • Tablet optimized experience across iPad, Android and Kindle
  • Active Directory integration
  • Auditing
  • Integration with Amazon Workspaces

zocalo-central-hub

Comparing Cloud Compute Services

Comparing Cloud Compute Services.

Jason Read at CloudHarmony does a great job sorting through all of the different cloud computer offerings by vendors and then compares their performance in a like-to-like benchmark.  This is no small task and most reports I have read comparing cloud compute do not do a good enough job of comparing similar services when conducting their performance tests.  You can obtain a copy of the full report from here which is 100+ pages long.

Below are some the test results along with my own comments as well.

Compute Service Provider  
Web Server Comparison Small Web Server Medium Web Server Large Web Server
Amazon EC2 (Instance Types Explained) c3.large + t2.medium c3.xlarge c3.2xlarge
DigitalOcean (Types Explained) 4 GB / 2 Cores 8 GB / 4 Cores 16 GB / 8 Cores
Google Compute Engine (Types Explained) n1-highcpu-2 n1-highcpu-4 n1-highcpu-8
Microsoft Azure (Tiers Explained) Medium (A2) Large (A3) Extra Large (A4)
Rackspace (Types Explained) Performance 1 2GB Performance 1 4GB Performance 1 8GB
SoftLayer (Types Explained) 2 GB / 2 Cores 4 GB / 4 Cores 8 GB / 8 Cores
Database Server Comparison Small Database Server Medium Database Server Large Database Server
Amazon EC2 c3.xlarge c3.2xlarge c3.4xlarge
DigitalOcean 8 GB / 4 Cores 16 GB / 8 Cores 48 GB / 16 Cores
Google Compute Engine n1-standard-4 n1-standard-8 n1-standard-16
Microsoft Azure Large (A3) Extra Large (A4) A9
Rackspace Performance 2 15GB Performance 2 30GB Performance 2 60GB
SoftLayer 8 GB / 4 Cores 16 GB / 8 Cores 32 GB / 16 Cores

Test Results

CPU Performance Results

In the web server test Amazon EC2 was a little better than the rest of the competition.  And in the database server test Rackspace was slightly better until the testing of large database servers where Azure’s new A9 server won out.

Also included in this test was CPU variability.  In these multi-tenant, shared resource environments the performance over time can be a risk to a customers if that is the case this test should be taken into consideration as well as the other variable tests included in the report.  For this test the lower the score the better, ideally you want the same performance over the life of the service.

In both tests Amazon had the best overall score across all server types.  The changing CPU types as testing across different server types should be considered when looking at these two scores as well.

Disk Performance Testing

In these tests Amazon EC2 and Rackspace were consistently faster and more reliable.  Since they are SSD based storage they should be faster and more consistent than the other services.  DigitalOcean is also SSD based but their performance was not on par with the other SSD based services and also had the highest rate of variability.  SoftLayer is not SSD based but their overall disk performance and consistency were very good.  This could be from using SSD caching but no matter how they are doing it the performance speaks for itself.  Microsoft Azure and Google do not offer SSD storage which is reflected in their testing.

 Web Server Tests

 

Memory Performance

In these test they conduct them only on the database servers and because of Azure’s older hardware based on AMD CPU and MOBO they did not perform well until the large database server test where they are using the newer Intel Sandy Bridge based platform.  Amazon and Google both perform well through all testing and outperformed the others.  Newer hardware is always going to win in these types of tests and that is reflected here.

External and Internal Network Performance

Network testing is always subjective and by testing cloud service providers networking throughput it just adds to the complexity of the configuration as some add additional ways to improve performance through different setups.  Amazon, Google and Rackspace seem to provide higher throughput then Microsoft Azure, DigitalOcean and Softlayer.  Also throughput by some vendors is limited depending on the size of the compute instance your purchase.

They also cover the value of each provider in their report which ultimately should be the deciding factor in choosing which cloud computing provider to use for your solution. After all there is no need to overspend on a service if you can accomplish everything you need with a cheaper solution.

You can download the full report here.