I am using cloudformation heavily currently, and I have a three stacks I am currently dealing with. The first stack is my load balancer stack, which essentially just has an application load balancer as its resource. The second stack only has a single resource: an elastic file system. The third stack is my main stack where I have an autoscaling group behind the load balancer mentioned in the first stack. This autoscaling group also mounts the EFS from the second stack onto each new instance. If my autoscaling group were to kill an unhealthy instance, and then initialize a new one to take its place, will it keep all of the files that were initially in the old EFS?
Basically, I am just wondering if files in an EFS in a particular instance will remain if that same file system is mounted in a different instance.
Basically, I am just wondering if files in an EFS in a particular instance will remain if that same file system is mounted in a different instance.
Yes. Files persist in an EFS filesystem until a) you delete them via a file operation from an instance that has mounted the EFS target, or b) the EFS resource itself is deleted from the console or CLI. They are independent of any instance.
This persistence is what make EFS useful as a sharable network attached file store. It is designed for your exact use case.
Please be aware you should consider backing up EFS fileshare to another EFS file share, or synced backup to S3, as a safety precaution. This backup is not built into the service, but can be added via scheduled tasks, Lambdas etc. In our system, I launch a scheduled instance once a day, and sync the production EFS with a backup EFS. for security and redundancy.
Until you use the same EFS on new machine that was used in destroyed machine, you will not loose your files.
Based on my experience and description provided on EFS webpage, EFS files are not lost until EFS is terminated. As It is also used for containers, which are easily throw away environment, it would also suit for your ELB based architecture as well.
"Amazon EFS is ideal for container storage providing persistent shared access to a common file repository"
https://aws.amazon.com/efs/
Related
Is it possible to actualy write/edit/delete files in Fargate ?
Since it's serverless and it doesn't really have a filesystem,
I couldn't get a clear answer about this.
For example, one of our clients needs to write some temporary cache files on the local container.
Is this possible ?
I don't want to setup a whole Data Container Volume just for this..
Thanks !
Fargate runs containers. It is Containers as a Service (CaaS). Your container (Docker) can be anything, Linux, Windows etc. You DO have a filesystem in Fargate, it is OS filesystem whatever you setup in your container. Your application is deployed on this file system and the OS user running your application has whatever permissions to the local filesystem that you give it in the container.
The file system is ephemeral meaning when your Fargate task stops and is destroyed, your local storage will be destroyed with it. It is also limited to a small amount of storage, maybe 10GB.
In Fargate you actually cannot mount a volume, like an EBS volume. If you need to do this you have to use EC2 launch type task in ECS instead of Fargate launch type ECS tasks if you want to use containers, or use a raw EC2 instance. This does not prevent you from read/write/delete access to the local file system inside your container.
So you can write local temp files just fine. If you need to persist the data after the life of the Fargate task or very large amounts of data, you need to write to some other storage like S3 or RDS.
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/AmazonECS/latest/developerguide/fargate-task-storage.html
Edit: Mounting EFS volumes in ECS and Fargate is now generally available.
I'm trying AWS auto-scaling for the first time, as far as I understand it creates instances if for example my CPU Utilization reaches critical level, that I define.
So I am curious, after I lunch my instance I spend a fair amount of time configuring it and copying the data, if AWS auto-scales my instance how will it configure the new instances and move the data to it?
You can't store any data that you want to keep on an instance that is part of an autoscaling group (well you can, but you will lose it).
There are (at least) two ways to answer your question:
Create a 'golden image', in other words spin-up an instance, configure it, install the software etc and then save it as an AMI (amazon machine image). Then tell the autoscaling group to use that AMI each time an instance starts - it will be pre-configured when it starts.
Put a script on the instance that tells the instance how to configure itself when it starts up (in the user data). SO basically each time an instance scales up, it runs the script and does all the steps it needs to to configure itself.
As for you data, best practice would be to store any data you want to keep in a database or object store that is not on the instance - so something like RDS, DynamoDB or even S3 objects.
You could also use AWS EFS, store there your data/scripts that the EC2 Instances will be sharing, and automatically mount it every time a new EC2 Instance is created via /etc/fstab.
Once you have configured the EFS to be mounted on the EC2 Instance (/etc/fstab), you should create a new AMI, and use this new AMI to create a new Launch Configuration and AutoScaling Group, so that the new Instances automatically mount your EFS and are able to consume that shared data.
https://aws.amazon.com/efs/faq/
Q. What use cases is Amazon EFS intended for?
Amazon EFS is designed to provide performance for a broad spectrum of
workloads and applications, including Big Data and analytics, media
processing workflows, content management, web serving, and home
directories.
Q. When should I use Amazon EFS vs. Amazon Simple Storage Service (S3)
vs. Amazon Elastic Block Store (EBS)?
Amazon Web Services (AWS) offers cloud storage services to support a
wide range of storage workloads.
Amazon EFS is a file storage service for use with Amazon EC2. Amazon
EFS provides a file system interface, file system access semantics
(such as strong consistency and file locking), and
concurrently-accessible storage for up to thousands of Amazon EC2
instances. Amazon EBS is a block level storage service for use with
Amazon EC2. Amazon EBS can deliver performance for workloads that
require the lowest-latency access to data from a single EC2 instance.
Amazon S3 is an object storage service. Amazon S3 makes data available
through an Internet API that can be accessed anywhere.
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/efs/latest/ug/mount-fs-auto-mount-onreboot.html
You can use the file fstab to automatically mount your Amazon EFS file
system whenever the Amazon EC2 instance it is mounted on reboots.
There are two ways to set up automatic mounting. You can update the
/etc/fstab file in your EC2 instance after you connect to the instance
for the first time, or you can configure automatic mounting of your
EFS file system when you create your EC2 instance.
I recommend using a shared data container if it is data that is updated and the updated data is needed by all instances that might be spinning up.
If it is database data or you could store the needed data in a database I would consider using an RDS.
If it is static data only used to configure the instances like dumps or configuration files which are not updated by running instances then I would recommend pulling them from CloudFlare or S3 of iT is not possible to pull them from a repository.
Good luck
I am using AWS elastic beanstalk with autoscaling group
I wish to log events into files and be able to finish processing the files before instances terminate during a shutdown.
I read that lifecycle hooks can answer my requirement.
My question is: is there an alternative like using a common EBS file system for all the instances in the group that will always be kept live. If that is possible, is there any cons using that approach? Is IO slower?
EBS volume can not be attached to several EC2 instances at the same time.
But shared storage is possible with EFS — Elastic File System. It's pricey, so EFS is not suitable for large amounts of data. But it is as fast as any NFS share and can be mounted to hundreds of servers at the same time.
The only consideration is how you will mount EFS volume. Since Elastic Beanstalk doesn't support cloud-init, you will have to build an AMI or issue a mount command from your code.
How can i attach persistent storage on Elastic Beanstalk ?
I know i need to have a .config file where i set the parameters of the environment to run every time an instance is created.
My goal is to have a volume, let's say 100GB, that even if the instances got deleted/terminated, i have this volume with persistent data where all instances can access to read from.
I could use S3 to store this data, but it would require changes to the application, and latency could be a problem.
This way i could access the filesystem like any common server.
AWS now offer a solution called Elastic File System (Amazon EFS) that lets multiple instances access a shared file store.
If your desire is to have a central data repository that all EC2 instances can access, then Amazon S3 would be your best option.
Normal disk volumes are provided via Elastic Block Store (EBS). EBS volumes can only be mounted to one EC2 instance at a time. Therefore, to share data that is contained on an EBS volume, you will need to use normal network sharing methods to mount network volumes.
However, if your goal is to provide shared access without one specific instance sharing a volume to other instances, then it is better to use S3 because it is accessible from all instances. It would likely be worth the effort of modifying your application to take advantage of S3.
I am facing an architecture-related problem:
I have created a new environment in ElasticBeanstalk and pushed my app there. All good so far. I have set it to auto scale up/down.
My app depends on filesystem storage (it creates files and then serves them to users). I am using an EBS volume (5gb large) to create the files and then push them to S3 and delete them from EBS. The reason I'm using EBS is because of ephemeral filesystem in EC2 instances.
When AWS scales up new instances don't have the EBS volume attached because EBS can be attached to one instance at a time.
When it scales down, it shuts down the instance that had the EBS volume attached, which totally messes things up.
I have added to /etc/fstab a special line that will automatically mount the EBS volume to /data but that only applies for the instance I add the file to /etc/fstab. I guess the solution here would be to create a customized AMI image with that special line. But again, EBS can't be attached to more than one instance at a time, so it seems like a dead end.
What am I thinking wrong? What would be a possible solution or the proper way of doing it?
For some reason, I believe that using S3 is not the right way of doing it.
S3 is a fine way to do it: your application creates the file, uploads to S3, removes the file from the local filesystem, and hands a URL to access the file back to the client. Totally reasonable. Why you can't use ephemeral storage for this. Instance store-backed instances have additional storage available, mounted to /mnt by default. Why can't the application create the file there? If the files don't need to be persisted between instance start/stop/reboot then there's no great reason to use EBS (unless you want faster boot times for your autoscale instances I suppose).