151–160 of 164 posts
Neat job, keep up the great work! There is also OVH as competitor. Their panel and documentation is not the best but once you integrate, it works like a charm and I guess they are the cheapest object storage service out there in the market: https://www.ovh.com/us/public-cloud/storage/object-storage/
Not to mention b2 and several others that are cheaper.
The article states: "Wasabi’s durability is 11 x 9s, the same as Amazon S3. To put that in context, if you stored 1 million 1 GB files in Wasabi, you would expect on average to lose one file every 659,000 years" Can someone walk me through the math here? I specifically curious about why the size of the file being 1 GB is relevant to the calculation.
It doesn't matter. This is marketing fluff. What companies like Amazon do is count how many hard drives would need to simultaneously fail to lose data, calculate the odds of a hard drive losing data, and then multiplying. This gets you to 11 9's. In practice, this is almost certainly not going to be why you lose data. That will be because of a chain of human errors, or a code bug, or because the user accidentally del…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I know this isn't going to be a popular opinion on HN, but I had the misfortune of using CloueFlare when they first started and experienced firsthand how amateurish the team behind it was. I tried them again three years ago and didn't see anything to change my opinion. The security incident last year cemented it for me. Thanks for your suggestion (honestly) but we won't ever be using CloudFlare so long as I have a sa…
They've definitely improved since then. You need to be on the $200/month plan and basically turn off the WAF (which is craptastic), then things are pretty good. All software has bugs. They just got unlucky, though their handling of the situation did raise a bunch of red flags.
I also have my dns with them on the free tier. But I am not running my regular traffic through their Network. I just plan to create a subdomain and run js, css, and images through it.
Would this not be recommended? Free CDN does seem too good to be true.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They've definitely improved since then. You need to be on the $200/month plan and basically turn off the WAF (which is craptastic), then things are pretty good. All software has bugs. They just got unlucky, though their handling of the situation did raise a bunch of red flags.
I was considering using cloudflare as a free static asset CDN. On several of the speed test rankings they show cloudflare at or near the top. I also have my dns with them on the free tier. But I am not running my regular traffic through their Network. I just plan to create a subdomain and run js, css, and images through it. Would this not be recommended? Free CDN does seem too good to be true.
Some quick observations: - Their performance claims are incredibly biased. Amazon S3 has far better write performance than their claims. - They claim 100% S3 compatibility but it fails a large number of API calls using Ceph’s s3-test. I didn’t dig into this too far but they do claim “No need to change your S3-compatible application” so changing my endpoint + credentials should have worked. To their credit - PUT, GET…
There may be sufficient market for S3-using companies that mostly use storage (sufficient API overlap and much lower costs).
But the prices are so low you also grab another category: young companies that want a migration path to S3 but cannot afford it so well yet.
And there's business models that'd only work with cheap enough storage - and Wasabi's price is very low indeed.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Separate AWS account with write-only permission to backup S3 objects from production pushed out to the backup account. Enable versioning and glacier in backup account. Lock down backup account credentials appropriately. (And add alerting and periodic fire drills of course.)
Amazon is still a single point of failure when you backup S3 to S3. What if they deploy a silent corruption bug next year?
But you can not have Backblaze and Wasabi at a price point that is less than half of S3. Not sure about this Glacier stuff.
There's also B2 ( https://www.backblaze.com/b2/cloud-storage.html ), which is I think the cheapest of them all. UPDATE: Well, egress is cheaper. B2 is $0.005/GB storage with $0.02/GB egress. But one thing to consider is that B2 storage is located within one single datacenter. (Disclaimer: I am not affiliated, but am in the process of deciding to use B2.)
B2 is horribly unstable, has limits left and right and most of all, the latency is horrendous. You will be better off using any standard OpenStack provider. That way you won't have a lock in, and great performance (in my testing). E.g. OpenStack Swift on OVH. Sure it's a tiny bit more expensive. But you get a mature cross-provider API and better performance. Even for huge chunks of cold data, I wouldn't want to use B…
It looks really promising, and pricing is very reasonable. Thank you for pointing it out.
S3 IA has a 30-day minimum, like Google Nearline, and Google Coldline is 90-day minimum. These make it very hard to predict and control pricing.
Backblaze B2 may not be as high performance, but their pricing is very low AND very predictable. No gimmicks. I've received many HashBackup customer emails mentioning that they use B2 and have never received complaints about their service.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was considering using cloudflare as a free static asset CDN. On several of the speed test rankings they show cloudflare at or near the top. I also have my dns with them on the free tier. But I am not running my regular traffic through their Network. I just plan to create a subdomain and run js, css, and images through it. Would this not be recommended? Free CDN does seem too good to be true.
They explicitly forbid that use case in their ToS, so no, it is not recommended.
The biggest reason why I use S3 is not price or performance. Competing with them on price or performance is not going to work. I use S3 because of convenience. Build something more convenient, I'll switch.