Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Object Storage: AWS vs Google Cloud Storage vs Azure Storage vs DigitalOcean

chooseacloud.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 115 posts

Re: Object Storage: AWS vs Google Cloud Storage vs Azure Storage vs DigitalOcean

#61

Post by puzzle »

beepbeepbeep1 wrote: post #49
truetraveller wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really wanted to like B2. I love the docs and super-clean interface. But B2 was just too "weird" when it came to uploading an object. You can't replace an object key, so you always get a new object key when uploading. This is unlike any normal object store, where you can just upload to an existing key. Also, if you upload an object with the same name (e.g. myphoto.png) it creates a new version, and there's no way t…

B2 is great as a backup store. I use it for backup. I wouldn't use it for non backup object storage, as it's in a single data center. S3 and Google Cloud are completely different, I'm not sure on the Google specifics but S3 has data replicated across three AZs.

GCS has multi-AZ replication, but also multi-region (at a premium).

Re: Object Storage: AWS vs Google Cloud Storage vs Azure Storage vs DigitalOcean

#62

Post by overcast »

blowski wrote: post #3

How does Digital Ocean compare in terms of reliability and compatibility with existing tools? I haven't used it, so genuine question.

From their documentation.

Spaces provides a RESTful XML API for programatically managing the data you store through the use of standard HTTP requests. The API is interoperable with Amazon's AWS S3 API allowing you to interact with the service while using the tools you already know.

Re: Object Storage: AWS vs Google Cloud Storage vs Azure Storage vs DigitalOcean

#63

Post by zwily »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #52
beepbeepbeep1 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

B2 is great as a backup store. I use it for backup. I wouldn't use it for non backup object storage, as it's in a single data center. S3 and Google Cloud are completely different, I'm not sure on the Google specifics but S3 has data replicated across three AZs.

Isn't backing up the last place where you want zero redundancy?

A backup has redundancy already - your local copy + the backup.

(edit: I’m talking about geographic redundancy. B2 does use redundancy inside the datacenter to protect from drive failure, etc)

Re: Object Storage: AWS vs Google Cloud Storage vs Azure Storage vs DigitalOcean

#64

Post by askaboutit »

corobo wrote: post #60
askaboutit wrote: post #58

Wasabi storage has unlimited egress now. So spaces with its rate limiting doesn’t seem that much of a big deal. Storage is something that won’t make much money in a few years I believe. I think the Egress overcharging maybe finally seeing decent competition. https://wasabi.com/pricing/

"unlimited" - It looks like if you actually try to use unlimited you get limited, it's closer to a Dropbox competitor than an s3 competitor > If your use case creates an unreasonable burden on our infrastructure, we reserve the right to limit your egress traffic and/or ask you to switch to our Legacy pricing plan. > Wasabi’s hot cloud storage service is not designed to be used to serve up (for example) web pages at a…

Oh, well that puts a kink in that. They had an example of 1PB costing $90,000 to download from S3. On their old plan it would be $40,000 (quick math). I think if the company was that large S3, comes across as a much better offering.

Re: Object Storage: AWS vs Google Cloud Storage vs Azure Storage vs DigitalOcean

#65

Post by manigandham »

hacknat wrote: post #53

I work for a company that has to provision hosted products for customers across all the clouds and the one that has been impressing me the most lately is Azure. The load balancers are also the gateways (sound network topology), so there is no need for elastic IPs, NAT Gateways, or proxy protocol. The other thing I like about Azure is they have storage classes that automatically cross region replicate. The automatic s…

You don't need any that for load balancing on any cloud. Google Cloud has the best load balancer with a global anycast address that will route to the nearest DC with instances and free capacity.

For automatic cross-region replication for storage, are you talking about Azure's GRS class? That's the same as GCP's multiregional class and AWS allows you to setup entire bucket replication to anywhere else in a few clicks.

Re: Object Storage: AWS vs Google Cloud Storage vs Azure Storage vs DigitalOcean

#66

Post by jnsaff2 »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #52
beepbeepbeep1 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

B2 is great as a backup store. I use it for backup. I wouldn't use it for non backup object storage, as it's in a single data center. S3 and Google Cloud are completely different, I'm not sure on the Google specifics but S3 has data replicated across three AZs.

Isn't backing up the last place where you want zero redundancy?

I guess what OP meant was that for backups durability is important and periods of downtime are not as crucial as for say catpicturegram.

Re: Object Storage: AWS vs Google Cloud Storage vs Azure Storage vs DigitalOcean

#67

Post by mrep »

sitepodmatt wrote: post #36
martinald wrote: post #23

The bandwidth egress charges on AWS (and GCP/Azure) are way too high. It almost seems cartel like. Bandwidth costs have dropped by a huge factor over the past few years; but none of this has been passed on. I really hope backblaze and/or DO manage to cause the big three some hurt on this and get them to reduce prices significantly; 7c/GB is really high these days.

What are bandwidth costs? This comes up again and again, people see HE.net / Cogent / Level3 / Hibernia / NTT whatever offering 10gig handoff IP transit at a colo neutral location for X per month and somehow determine the true cost. When I suspect the reality is that much of cost is invested in routing equipment both internally and externally, evolving SDN and all the goodness it affords, being able to offer SLA per…

I met a network engineer for amazon about a year ago and I brought up the prices since I had heard about them being expensive here on hacker news. He laughed about it and said it was one of their most profitable departments with like a 90% margin.

Re: Object Storage: AWS vs Google Cloud Storage vs Azure Storage vs DigitalOcean

#68

Post by milesward »

Cool site, but noticing an error: This compares AWS S3 single region pricing ($0.024/gb) to GCP GCS multi-region pricing ($0.026/gb) rather than GCP GCS single region pricing ($0.020/gb). Hopefully the creator/author will correct the discrepancy... Disclosure: I'm a pricing dweeb at Google Cloud
Post reply on HN