Live data from Hacker News

AWS Transfer for SFTP – Fully Managed SFTP Service for Amazon S3

aws.amazon.com

141–150 of 158 posts

Re: AWS Transfer for SFTP – Fully Managed SFTP Service for Amazon S3

#142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn’t count on that. These hyperscale players don’t have the time to worry about their “friends”. Example: Do you really think that the warm embrace of VMware Horizon and Citrix on Azure is the beginning of a long and fruitful relationship?

That’s a fair point, but I would look to specific markets instead of tech to see where AWS and Amazon might run into issues. Specifically within healthcare. You think large Pharma companies will use AWS after the pill pocket acquisition? Do you think once Amazon.com starts listing prosthetics large life sciences companies will run on AWS? What about providers? Do you think health systems will choose AWS as their clou…

I would agree that it's unlikely that Google or Microsoft will start making prosthetics -- although they could spin GCP or Azure off into other corporate entities or operators who did someday.

More likely would be that Google, Amazon, Microsoft and some affiliated company would be competing in a space where telemetry from something like a prosthetic was reporting information that had some value.

In any situation, the downside of renting something is that you lose control. It is something that you need to think about and incorporate into your business strategy in some scenarios.

Re: AWS Transfer for SFTP – Fully Managed SFTP Service for Amazon S3

#143
post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can you elaborate? I mean a plain CentOS server running SFTP, S3FS seems about as set and forget as it gets. Think about the operational costs: someone needs to manage keys, logging, security updates, when S3FS coughs a lung and hangs you need to catch that problem and remount it to restore service, etc. This service reuses the existing authentication systems so you don't need to spend time configuring and managing…

Exactly this. If sticker cost is your leading factor then these kinds of services can seem crazy, but when you factor in the real cost of self-hosting then it quickly becomes a no-brainer. We're more interested in what happens when things break (and who's responsibility it is) than minor cost savings in calm waters.

One other area which tends to get ignored is opportunity cost: if it's the only thing you do there are many things which aren't that hard to operate but if they're not a primary function the cost of having to pull someone off of other projects to handle problems, security updates, etc. is more than the direct service costs.

Re: AWS Transfer for SFTP – Fully Managed SFTP Service for Amazon S3

#144
post #44

It seems there are no web-hooks / callbacks, so you don't get notified when a new file is uploaded (or someone downloads a file). Another issue is that if your have to support a partner with SFTP data transfer requirements you may have to support one with FTP/FTPS requirements as well. At this point you will have to go to a dedicated FTP server (or outsource it to another company) anyway, and AWS SFTP service will be…

You can set a lambda to be triggered on a file upload, at work we do this for creating reports. Lambda dumps mongo data to an s3 bucket which triggers another lambda to create a csv.

I see. Lambdas are more fussy though, I can’t just trigger an action in my server, I have to write code that does that.

Re: AWS Transfer for SFTP – Fully Managed SFTP Service for Amazon S3

#145
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've found anything more complex than an adapter or cable to be of inferior quality with Amazon Basics, and rarely buy those options anymore.

The mini condenser microphones are actually REALLY good and on par with Yeti and other $100+ mics. https://smile.amazon.com/AmazonBasics-Desktop-Mini-Condenser...

According to reviews that's a lowly electret microphone capsule ($1) in a big housing. For podcasting you want a directional microphone. In defense of electrets, they sound great, but pick up everything.

The shape of the microphone suggests it's a directional microphone (and if you read the reviews, people think it is directional). That's perhaps not a scam, but certainly deceptive.

Re: AWS Transfer for SFTP – Fully Managed SFTP Service for Amazon S3

#146
post #88
post #46

Charged by the hour... pay for an instance.. Tsk tsk.. The thing I love about S3 and cloud services in general is when I pay per request and can scale through the roof. Whenever a services is meter by number of instances my interest fades, and I look for other solutions.. S3 has this very handsoff feeling to it :)

Well, its likely because the sftp server itself is always running. If they had an sftp lambda function... sure.

Sure, it's because an sftp server is always running.

But I immediately extrapolate that this also means it has bandwidth limits and limits on concurrency, etc.

Re: AWS Transfer for SFTP – Fully Managed SFTP Service for Amazon S3

#147

We use a number of AWS LightSail servers for SFTP today, which mostly sit idle. Will definitely adopt this!

Really? Lightsail costs you $0.0047 USD/hour. This costs $0.30/hour. It's ~80x more.

Didn't notice SFTP costs. Guess I'm sticking with LightSail.

Re: AWS Transfer for SFTP – Fully Managed SFTP Service for Amazon S3

#148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only downside is whitelisting but not on the SFTP server-side. Many enterprises restrict egress SFTP (usually for security reasons) so you need to provide IPs and they can’t frequently change because it can take enterprise network admins quite some time to deal with all of the bureaucracy and change control. That said, I wouldn’t be surprised if modern networking gear can handle CNAMEs but there’s no guarantee th…

You can get a dedicated S3 gateway which has a static IP.

I didn’t know that. Is it the storage gateway you’re referring to?

Re: AWS Transfer for SFTP – Fully Managed SFTP Service for Amazon S3

#150
post #26

Sftp is natively supported by Linux. I'm surprised this is a thing.

it isn't to my knowledge. You need an ssh client that supports sftp.

Unless you disable it in the sshd_config, it's supported by most Linux distributions. Yes, you'll need a client, but any modern client supports sftp. The only tricky part is chrooting the users.
Post reply on HN