I am currently evaluating the fastest possible caching solutions that we can use among the Technologies in question. We know that while Redis and Hazelcast are caching solutions by their very intent and definition, and there is a clear stackoverflow link @ redis vs hazelcast, there is also the AWS S3 which may not be a caching solution but is nevertheless, a storage and retrieval service + it supports SQL as well which makes it in my opinion a qualifier in the race as well. Considering this, are there any forethoughts on comparing the three based on speed, volumes of data etc.?
Hazelcast also provides SQL alike capabilities - run queries to fetch data in a resultset. Technology wise, Hazelcast/Redis and S3 are fundamentally different; for the latter is a disk bound data store and that are proven/known to be significantly slower than their in-memory counterparts.
To put things in a logical perspective: S3 or any other disk bound data store can not match the performance of accessing data from in-memory data stores.
However, it is also a common practice to run Hazelcast on top of a disk bound data store to get performance boost. In such type of architectures, your applications basically always only interact with Hazelcast. One can then use Hazelcast tools to keep the cached data in sync with underlying database.