Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Is it necessary to backup S3?

news.ycombinator.com

1–10 of 30 posts

Re: Ask HN: Is it necessary to backup S3?

#2
How would you feel if one day that data was lost ?

There are already documented cases of Amazon losing data in S3.

The Amazon S3 SLA does not cover data loss at all, only service unavailable situations, which they will cover by crediting you.

http://aws.amazon.com/s3-sla/

http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2007/10/09/amazo...

And even if all this was not the case you have a responsibility to your customers you can not outsource that responsibility.

Re: Ask HN: Is it necessary to backup S3?

#3
You can put all the marketing spin on it that you want, but S3 is still just another webapp. Architected by humans, operated by humans.

If you think the humans at Amazon are somehow above making mistakes or bad decisions, then there is no need to backup your data.

If you don't fully trust the humans at Amazon, and what to be able to have access to your data, on your terms, at any time, you should back it up...

Re: Ask HN: Is it necessary to backup S3?

#4
Sofar I have never heard about S3 actually losing data (apart from users erasing it). They store everything 3 times. But I would have a look at the cost/MB. Documents are usually small and important (thus, worth to backup). I have read that SmugMug, for example, stores it's files just on S3, with no backup.

Re: Ask HN: Is it necessary to backup S3?

#5
post #4

Sofar I have never heard about S3 actually losing data (apart from users erasing it). They store everything 3 times. But I would have a look at the cost/MB. Documents are usually small and important (thus, worth to backup). I have read that SmugMug, for example, stores it's files just on S3, with no backup.

http://www.google.com/search?q=amazon+s3+dataloss

Re: Ask HN: Is it necessary to backup S3?

#6
post #4

Sofar I have never heard about S3 actually losing data (apart from users erasing it). They store everything 3 times. But I would have a look at the cost/MB. Documents are usually small and important (thus, worth to backup). I have read that SmugMug, for example, stores it's files just on S3, with no backup.

apart from users erasing it

Very very important caveat, there. If you have three copies of the data, but all of them are in the same S3 account, a prankster who steals your S3 creds can delete all of them in about ten seconds.

Or, if you make a typing mistake, you can do that to yourself. Boy oh boy, will that be an unhappy day.

Diversify, diversify, diversify.

Re: Ask HN: Is it necessary to backup S3?

#8
At the end of the day it's an economics question. How much might you lose in a worst case scenario if you failed to recover some vital data? How much extra will it cost to back up your data to a second place? If the answers to those questions are "everything" and "not a lot" then there is no reason not to backup your backups.

As a general rule important data should be backed up to (at least) two separate places, and in this scenario I'd consider S3 to be one place.

Re: Ask HN: Is it necessary to backup S3?

#10
post #4

Sofar I have never heard about S3 actually losing data (apart from users erasing it). They store everything 3 times. But I would have a look at the cost/MB. Documents are usually small and important (thus, worth to backup). I have read that SmugMug, for example, stores it's files just on S3, with no backup.

apart from users erasing it Very very important caveat, there. If you have three copies of the data, but all of them are in the same S3 account, a prankster who steals your S3 creds can delete all of them in about ten seconds. Or, if you make a typing mistake, you can do that to yourself. Boy oh boy, will that be an unhappy day. Diversify, diversify, diversify.

Very true. One instance I can think of is using the firefox addon S3Fox for managing S3. My co-worker came close to deleting a prod bucket with 80K+ images.
Post reply on HN