Durch die Nutzung von AWS re:Post stimmt du den AWS re:Post Nutzungsbedingungen
AWS re:Postre:Post

React applictaion on EC2 or S3?

0

I currently have five React applications hosted on a single EC2 instance. I've heard that it's possible to host React applications on Amazon S3 as well. I'm interested in determining which hosting option is more cost-effective, taking into account all aspects, with a primary focus on data transfer costs.

Themen
SpeicherKalkulation
Tags
Amazon S3-GlacierAmazon EC2
Sprache
English
Fasil
gefragt vor 7 Monaten307 Aufrufe
2 Antworten
0

Hello.

As you know, it is possible to host React.js on S3.
https://docs.aws.amazon.com/prescriptive-guidance/latest/patterns/deploy-a-react-based-single-page-application-to-amazon-s3-and-cloudfront.html

In terms of server management costs, I think hosting with S3 will be cheaper.
There shouldn't be much of a difference in data transfer charges between EC2 and S3.
https://aws.amazon.com/s3/pricing/?nc1=h_ls
https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/on-demand/?nc1=h_ls#Data_Transfer

profile picture
EXPERTE
Riku_Kobayashi
beantwortet vor 7 Monaten
profile pictureAWS
EXPERTE
Didier_Durand
überprüft vor 7 Monaten
  • Didier_Durand EXPERTE
    vor 7 Monaten

    Agreed, If you compare monthly storage price of 1 GB in S3 to the hourly cost of your instance of choice, you'll be able to compute the savings

  • Marcus Rosen
    vor 7 Monaten

    If you put CloudFront in front of the S3 bucket, the data transfer costs will generally lower than serving from S3 directly plus it has quite a generous free tier.

    https://aws.amazon.com/cloudfront/pricing/

0

S3 will be cheaper , you only pay storage. Data transfer will apply to both

Mario RH
beantwortet vor 7 Monaten

Du bist nicht angemeldet. Anmelden um eine Antwort zu veröffentlichen.

Eine gute Antwort beantwortet die Frage klar, gibt konstruktives Feedback und fördert die berufliche Weiterentwicklung des Fragenstellers.

Richtlinien für die Beantwortung von Fragen

Relevanter Inhalt