# Deploy ECK with local storage **URL:** \ **Category:** Elastic Cloud on Kubernetes (ECK)\ **Created:** [May 25, 2020, 7:01am UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/deploy-eck-with-local-storage/234086 "2020-05-25T07:01:42Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 5
**Author:** ![pebrc](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/elastic/user_avatar/discuss.elastic.co/pebrc/32/101790_2.png) [@pebrc](https://discuss.elastic.co/u/pebrc)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2020, 12:16pm UTC](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/deploy-eck-with-local-storage/234086/5 "2020-06-08T12:16:30Z")
There should be no need to create different storage classes for the different node types unless this is really what you wanted: e.g. cheap spinning disks for warm data nodes, fast solid state disks for hot data nodes and masters etc. But reading through your post I don't think this is the case here. Have a look at this answer from @sebgl which lists a few options for local volume provisioning that will take the burden of managing persistent volumes manually from you: > [@Best option for persistent volume of an on-premise ECK](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/best-option-for-persistent-volume-of-an-on-premise-eck/215611/2): > > Hi @Ali_Reza_Haghighat, You're right: we do not recommend NFS, which generally offers poor performance for Elasticsearch. We also have problems using Local volume (Pod crashes after a few document insertion) This seems a bit strange. How are you handling the local volumes? A few options you may want to look at: If you have any network-attached PersistentVolume provider available, that's by far the easiest option. GCP persistent disks and AWS ELBs now offer pretty good performance, depend… --- _[View the full topic](https://discuss.elastic.co/t/deploy-eck-with-local-storage/234086)._