Can you use R2 to host a static website as easily as you can with S3?
To host static websites, you use Cloudflare Pages.
Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees
31–40 of 220 posts
Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees
#32$15 is too expensive, especially if you want to follow proper 3-2-1 it'll cost you $45/TB What happens to your Object Storage buckets when Cloudflare has an outage? - https://filebase.com/blog/what-happens-when-my-cloud-goes-do...
The claim is that the service handles distribution across reliability, so I think the more interesting question is the odds of that _mechanism_ failing when your site would otherwise be up[1].
Similarly, 3-2-1 is a backup strategy and the pricing appears to already include multiple copies using the same mechanism so the correct calculation would be the cost of R2 plus whatever _different_ mechanism you choose for disaster recovery purposes such as on-premise storage or a completely different provider.
1. For example, if you use Cloudflare as your CDN / DNS provider and they have a catastrophic failure, the fact that your storage is inaccessible is just another facet of the same issue.
Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees
#33Really interesting, will R2 support lifecycle rules like S3 does? We write around 90 million files per month to S3, if we could replace that with R2 and have the files automatically expire after 30 days that'd be a pretty amazing price reduction for us.
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.
Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees
#34As someone who took up making travel videos as a hobby, this is definitely on my radar. Video files are large, although ~20 cents per video streamed for a small website is manageable (S3, Cloud Storage, Azure...), it's the potential for abuse that could drive my bill up that terrifies me, which is why I decided to stick to Hetzner VMs with their 20TB of free egress.
Have you seen their Stream product, any use? Came out of their last batch of features if I recall https://www.cloudflare.com/en-gb/products/cloudflare-stream/
I have, I've also taken a look at Mux. Both would be fantastic options, and I'm still considering them, but I don't have many films and I'm biased towards distributing the original high-quality encodes.
Both of these services significantly reduce the file-size with a re-encode, even if they promote an "impercievable quality loss". They seem to be more suited to high traffic on-demand streaming for websites, promotional material, etc.
Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees
#35> Our object storage will be extremely inexpensive for infrequent access and yet capable of and cheaper than major incumbent providers at scale. How frequent is infrequent? In our case it's "never unless other backups fail" and for that S3 Glacier Deep Archive is still cheaper ($0.00099 per GB).
> currently planned to be in the single digit requests per second range
This is a little bit above your quoted paragraph
Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees
#36Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees
#37Can anyone confirm if R2 must be used with Workers and other Cloudflare services only? Is it possible to use as file storage instead of S3?
Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees
#38Can anyone confirm if R2 must be used with Workers and other Cloudflare services only? Is it possible to use as file storage instead of S3?
They've said it supports the S3 API, so yes, you could use it wherever you'd use S3 instead.
Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
Have you seen their Stream product, any use? Came out of their last batch of features if I recall https://www.cloudflare.com/en-gb/products/cloudflare-stream/
I have, I've also taken a look at Mux. Both would be fantastic options, and I'm still considering them, but I don't have many films and I'm biased towards distributing the original high-quality encodes. Both of these services significantly reduce the file-size with a re-encode, even if they promote an "impercievable quality loss". They seem to be more suited to high traffic on-demand streaming for websites, promotion…
Do you expect your viewer to download and not view it directly on a website?
Re: Cloudflare R2 storage: Rapid and reliable object storage, minus the egress fees
#40Can anyone confirm if R2 must be used with Workers and other Cloudflare services only? Is it possible to use as file storage instead of S3?
They say fully compatible with S3 API. I expect workers access to be just a sweet addition.