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

Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees

blog.cloudflare.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 220 posts

Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees

#201

Post by OJFord »

OJFord wrote: post #198
loxias wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Bandwidth Alliance" seems to be some sort of B2B consortium. I'll dig into this more later, but unless I'm missing something obvious (I very well might be...) there's not a easy/inexpensive method for me to sign up and join the "bandwidth alliance", so that data transfer from B2 to my laptop is free. I have a few VPSs with Linode, which is a member of the "Bandwidth Alliance" but I don't see any details, numbers, pr…

> there's not a easy/inexpensive method for me to sign up and join the "bandwidth alliance" As I said, you don't have to. As far as I recall you just use two 'B's in the 'B2B consortium' and it's policy applies to you.

'its'*, sorry I can't notice that and leave it, even if I've missed the edit window!

To make this comment a bit less useless though, all you have to do is something like this: https://help.backblaze.com/hc/en-us/articles/217666928-Using...

Weirdly they don't advertise it there.

More info here:

> the Bandwidth Alliance is a group of forward-thinking cloud and networking companies that are committed to discounting or waiving data transfer fees for shared customers.

https://blog.cloudflare.com/backblaze-b2-and-the-s3-compatib...

Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees

#202

Post by acdha »

Heliosmaster wrote: post #51
acdha wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They appear to be focused on an automatic version: > Behind the scenes, R2 automatically and intelligently manages the tiering of data to drive both performance at peak load and low-cost for infrequently requested objects. We’ve gotten rid of complex, manual tiering policies in favor of what developers have always wanted out of object storage: limitless scale at the lowest possible cost.

GP isn't mentioning lifecycle to change storage tier, but to delete the files after some time.

You're quite right — I think I was primed by a different mention of S3's intelligent tiering in this thread.

Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees

#203

Post by dwild »

loxias wrote: post #137
dwild wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> So if R2 is S3 with no egress, suddenly there is a value proposition again. Isn't B2 from Backblaze already filling that need? I means more choice is always better for sure, but considering R2 goal seems really to be a CDN more than a backup space and it does feel like their money maker is in the CDN part, not the storage part... I feel like trusting them to store it long-term without using the CDN part is a little…

B2 charges for egress, $0.01/GB. More interesting to me is Wasabi, which charges ~$0.006/GB*month and no egress fees at all.

Oh yeah, I mixed ingress with egress.

Now though I don't understands the original comment... why care about egress for backup storage? I means as long as it's not absurd (and I agree that AWS egress price is absurd, though the original comment wasn't complaining of that...), you usually don't expect to have to retrieve it and if required, you are ready to pay much more for it as it will be worth it.

Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees

#204

Post by nilayp »

busymom0 wrote: post #148
greg-m wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey, I'm the PM for R2. Yes to range requests. Current object limit is smaller than that, but we don't have a fundamental restriction there. Shoot me an email to gmckeon [at] cloudflare.

Really excited for R2 Storage. I am wondering if R2 can solve a limitation I was running into with BackBlaze. I had tried using BackBlaze 8 months ago as a much cheaper (especially with B2 and CF's Free Data Transfer partnership) replacement for Amazon S3 and was running into a limitation on B2. I had a scenario where my users can upload images from the browser to BackBlaze. I wanted the ability to control the file n…

Nilay from Backblaze here. Amongst other things, the solution engineering team reports up to me... and when I saw this comment yesterday, I had them dig into why the B2 S3 API doesn't did not work for you.

It turns out that Backblaze B2 absolutely does support uploading objects via S3 style presigned URLs. However, there are a couple of caveats:

1. B2 doesn't currently support PostObject operations. Therefore, you must use PutObject to upload to a pre-signed URL. Many of the AWS SDKs default to PostObject.

2. B2 only supports AWS v4 authentication and not v2, which AWS has deprecated. However, some AWS SDKs default to v2.

I've put together a very simple python code sample that successfully works for me. https://gist.github.com/nilayp/2c2a04f033d8992ce4b8f591ab449...

Would this solve your issue?

Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees

#205

Post by busymom0 »

nilayp wrote: post #204
busymom0 wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really excited for R2 Storage. I am wondering if R2 can solve a limitation I was running into with BackBlaze. I had tried using BackBlaze 8 months ago as a much cheaper (especially with B2 and CF's Free Data Transfer partnership) replacement for Amazon S3 and was running into a limitation on B2. I had a scenario where my users can upload images from the browser to BackBlaze. I wanted the ability to control the file n…

Nilay from Backblaze here. Amongst other things, the solution engineering team reports up to me... and when I saw this comment yesterday, I had them dig into why the B2 S3 API doesn't did not work for you. It turns out that Backblaze B2 absolutely does support uploading objects via S3 style presigned URLs. However, there are a couple of caveats: 1. B2 doesn't currently support PostObject operations. Therefore, you mu…

I appreciate you responding here.

I am currently away for this week, so I can't try it this week. Can I reach out to you next week with my findings? Is there an email address I can reach you at?

Just wanted to mention that I had raised my issues on the backblaze subreddit back then:

https://www.reddit.com/r/backblaze/comments/m9tioi/backblaze...

https://www.reddit.com/r/backblaze/comments/kzszym/is_backbl...

https://www.reddit.com/r/backblaze/comments/l0c9s7/is_there_...

Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees

#206

Post by chx »

dan15 wrote: post #195
jauer wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(approximately) Cloudflare provides a proxy service that you'd use to access your B2 data from home or other cloud without paying for egress. They can do this because it costs almost nothing to move data between B2 and Cloudflare, and then from Cloudflare to almost anywhere. Moving data from B2 to most other places on the internet likely costs them more because Backblaze isn't in a position to negotiate adventagous p…

Note that you can't use a free Cloudflare account just for things like images, video and other binary files, as they'll suspend the account. It must be used primarily for a website, not content hosting. If you only want to use Cloudflare for files, you need a paid account.

Nope, eastdakota confirmed it's fine as a b2 image proxy right here on HN.

Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees

#207

Post by Dylan16807 »

blackandsqueaky wrote: post #188
danielheath wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's "real consumption"? I'm getting 1tb egress / day on a $20/mo plan.

> What's "real consumption" Workloads you couldn't host on a cable modem

Your average cable modem can't do a good job of hosting much more than 50GB/day. Would you say that 1TB/day is well into 'real' then? You seem dismissive of that much.

Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees

#208

Post by dx034 »

danielheath wrote: post #185
mdasen wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way I read it is that for low-scale users, they're not going to have request pricing. For higher-scale users, "R2 will charge significantly less per-operation than the major providers". AWS charges $0.0004 per thousand GET requests. Let's say that R2 charges $0.0003 per thousand GET requests. That's still cheaper than AWS or Backblaze's B2 (even if just barely) and if they're not charging for bandwidth, then it's…

> Given that Cloudflare's costs are probably lower than Backblaze for bandwidth, that doesn't seem so unreasonable - but I could be very wrong. At scale, bandwidth capacity purchases are symmetric - you buy the same amount up as you do down. As a provider of DDOS protection services, Cloudflare has to maintain a huge amount of ingress capacity - meaning they have a ton of egress capacity sitting unused.

According to PeeringDB, they're mostly outbound [1]. I guess they already serve so much traffic that they don't need extra inbound capacity.

[1] https://www.peeringdb.com/asn/13335

Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees

#209

Post by dx034 »

dwild wrote: post #112
rsync wrote: post #106

This is interesting ... For the longest time we tried to convince people that they should have an off-amazon archive of their S3 data ... we even ran an ads to that effect in 2012[1]. The (obvious) reason this isn't compelling is the cost of egress. It's just (relatively) too expensive to offload your S3 assets to some third party on a regular basis. So if R2 is S3 with no egress, suddenly there is a value propositio…

> So if R2 is S3 with no egress, suddenly there is a value proposition again. Isn't B2 from Backblaze already filling that need? I means more choice is always better for sure, but considering R2 goal seems really to be a CDN more than a backup space and it does feel like their money maker is in the CDN part, not the storage part... I feel like trusting them to store it long-term without using the CDN part is a little…

Backblaze has only two locations and they cannot be used with the same account. Your data is (within one account) always just in California oder Amsterdam. For many needs, having multiple PoPs is crucial.

Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees

#210

Post by mkl »

chx wrote: post #206
dan15 wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Note that you can't use a free Cloudflare account just for things like images, video and other binary files, as they'll suspend the account. It must be used primarily for a website, not content hosting. If you only want to use Cloudflare for files, you need a paid account.

Nope, eastdakota confirmed it's fine as a b2 image proxy right here on HN.

Link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20790857
Post reply on HN