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

S3 isn't getting cheaper

matt-rickard.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 215 posts

Re: S3 isn't getting cheaper

#191

Post by themitigating »

chc wrote: post #109
themitigating wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that's his core argument then it undermines the entire blog post right? Not to mention it calls into question other information he's provided .All AWS pricing is available publicly , saying the prices are "held very secretly" and being obviously wrong isn't a good look.

It doesn't appear to be his core argument, so what is the point of this hypothetical?

That was incorrect of me to say. I was trying to say something like "He only has x key (core) points and if one is wrong it doesn't look good"

I used "core" incorrectly

Re: S3 isn't getting cheaper

#192

Post by i5heu »

gsanderson wrote: post #48
fxtentacle wrote: post #11

The main issue we have with S3 is the extortionary egress bandwidth fee. Storage pricing seems OK, but what's the point if I can't send those files to users?

The margin on bandwidth is enormous. I think Cloudflare did some research into it a while back. But there are rivals providing cheaper S3-compatible storage at scale. Cloudflare's R2 ($15/TB, and no fees for egress). Oracle Cloud Storage ($25/TB, and first 10TB of egress is free). There's Wasabi ($5.99/TB, and no fees for egress or API requests). To name but three. Of course each of those have drawbacks e.g Wasabi is…

> and no fees for egress

This is somewhat wrong. You have to serve R2 Objects via a Worker which will cost you something per hit.

So you have a kind of egress fee.

Re: S3 isn't getting cheaper

#193

Post by i5heu »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #103
gsanderson wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The margin on bandwidth is enormous. I think Cloudflare did some research into it a while back. But there are rivals providing cheaper S3-compatible storage at scale. Cloudflare's R2 ($15/TB, and no fees for egress). Oracle Cloud Storage ($25/TB, and first 10TB of egress is free). There's Wasabi ($5.99/TB, and no fees for egress or API requests). To name but three. Of course each of those have drawbacks e.g Wasabi is…

I didn't realize Cloudflare R2 was available yet. Took a look based on your mention... "currently in beta". But you can still just sign up and use it already? Anyone here done that and want to report back? Ah, I found this posted by it's author elsewhere in these threads: https://www.vantage.sh/blog/cloudflare-r2-aws-s3-comparison Very useful. Wait.... "no public access" AND "no pre-signed URLs"? Am I misunderstandin…

Sadly this dose not speak about data-integrity via eg. CRC.

Also I don't like it 1mm that I cants see how often and where my data is replicated

Re: S3 isn't getting cheaper

#194

Post by Helmut10001 »

Dunedan wrote: post #189
Helmut10001 wrote: post #175

I cannot speak for the big companies, but for private cloud storage, I suggest to go the route for self-hosting, all the tools are available in 2022: ZFS for reliability, Proxmox for separation of concerns, Opnsense/pfsense for access control, Nextcloud for convenience (if you need such file sync at all). Add a photovoltaic plant and your electricity bill will be _Ok_ (you should do this anyway). I have a 40 TB ZFS Z…

Your setup doesn't factor in labor cost and has a vastly lower durability. That's not to say that S3 is superior compared to your setup, but it's a different solution for different needs.

Yes, of course. Although I weight labor cost and return of technological knowledge gain against each other, i.e. a solution _for different needs_.

Re: S3 isn't getting cheaper

#195

Post by i5heu »

Rodeoclash wrote: post #102

Theirs other options available depending on your risk appetite. For example, I built a file sharing tool ( https://www.fileyeet.io/ ) off the back of Storj ( https://www.storj.io/ ) which is a distributed file storage backed by a crypto coin (maybe one of the few legitimate uses of crypto, although I'm not convinced yet). Storj was a much cheaper option than S3 although I do have to trust that their systems are as se…

I love Storj, very nice idea. Also they not need cryptocoins to work, they could just replace the tokes with something else.

Re: S3 isn't getting cheaper

#196

Post by hinkley »

bushbaba wrote: post #166
hinkley wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s noteworthy to me that available memory has not increased in some time. You can find machines with more memory, and perhaps the number of classes has increased, but outside of very narrow envelopes it might be cheaper to have 2 m6i’s with undersubscribed CPUs than to try to increase the amount of cpu per core on something else.

see the u6tb-1 and x2i machines

I don’t know what data center u6tb-1 is in but it’s not in the ones I use.

X2i is interesting, but may overshoot the mark for the service I’m thinking of, but might be appropriate for another. I may have to try again as to whether I can make the r6i math work.

Re: S3 isn't getting cheaper

#197

Post by vlovich123 »

jrochkind1 wrote: post #103
gsanderson wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The margin on bandwidth is enormous. I think Cloudflare did some research into it a while back. But there are rivals providing cheaper S3-compatible storage at scale. Cloudflare's R2 ($15/TB, and no fees for egress). Oracle Cloud Storage ($25/TB, and first 10TB of egress is free). There's Wasabi ($5.99/TB, and no fees for egress or API requests). To name but three. Of course each of those have drawbacks e.g Wasabi is…

I didn't realize Cloudflare R2 was available yet. Took a look based on your mention... "currently in beta". But you can still just sign up and use it already? Anyone here done that and want to report back? Ah, I found this posted by it's author elsewhere in these threads: https://www.vantage.sh/blog/cloudflare-r2-aws-s3-comparison Very useful. Wait.... "no public access" AND "no pre-signed URLs"? Am I misunderstandin…

Overlooked this question:

> But you can still just sign up and use it already

Yes. You can just enter a credit card & start using it.

Re: S3 isn't getting cheaper

#198

Post by jrochkind1 »

vlovich123 wrote: post #160
jrochkind1 wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I didn't realize Cloudflare R2 was available yet. Took a look based on your mention... "currently in beta". But you can still just sign up and use it already? Anyone here done that and want to report back? Ah, I found this posted by it's author elsewhere in these threads: https://www.vantage.sh/blog/cloudflare-r2-aws-s3-comparison Very useful. Wait.... "no public access" AND "no pre-signed URLs"? Am I misunderstandin…

We do have presigned URLs actually. Public buckets coming soon

Thanks! That may meet all my requirements...

Although one of my use cases is video files (fairly small non-profit usage), which I have understood are not allowed by CloudFlare CDN terms of service (at least at non-"enterprise" tiers?)... it's been confusing to me understanding if I could, for example, serve video files from Backblaze via CloudFlare CDN and Bandwidth Alliance; or with R2, if there's a way to serve video files from R2 to the public that is allowed by tos.

Re: S3 isn't getting cheaper

#199

Post by edmundsauto »

nl wrote: post #164
DannyBee wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it so highly ironic that anyone truly believes this would end up better. They would not fight over customers, in the same way the breakup of AT&T did not result in a fight over customers - only a more complete, nimble, and effective domination of the entire US that lasts to this day. These companies are hamstrung by their size and internal cultural infighting - you will break them into much more effective unit…

I'm unconvinced that breaking them up is a good thing or not. But for me the biggest "for" argument isn't that the broken up companies will compete with each other (that makes no sense because you'd break them up along business lines where they don't compete anyway). Instead for me it is that it removes cross subsidies both financial (as in "we can give away this loss making application because we make so much money…

It’s interesting - those financial cross-subsidies could lead to a situation where the sum(consumer_value_from_free_product) > total_consumer_harm.

Re: S3 isn't getting cheaper

#200

Post by vineyardmike »

hsbauauvhabzb wrote: post #110
Gigachad wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There would be exabytes of content on youtube over 5 years old with under 20 views. Stuff no one will miss when its gone.

Except people that use YT as a family video archive

They’ll probably migrate those people to a “Google Photos” or “Google Drive” storage option so they pay for their usage but still have archive and sharing options.
Post reply on HN