Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's Mac-only, right? Can anyone suggest an equivalent Windows tool for backing up to Amazon?
Jungledisk, Duplicaty (LGPL)
That would be Duplicati -- my favorite backup utility.
Amazon Glacier
331–340 of 393 posts
Re: Amazon Glacier
#332Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you can afford 10Gbps to the internet, $22k is probably chump change.
You can afford 1Gbps for as little as $70/mo. Currently only in Kansas City, but it will probably expand to other cities soon.
That's a 1Gbps connection. Try sustaining 1Gpbs and see if you don't start getting nastygrams.
There is a huge difference between a residential connection with a peak speed of X and an X speed connection.
Re: Amazon Glacier
#333Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Paying $12 to store a gigabyte of data for 100 years" I'm not sure what kind of organisation I'd actually trust to store data for that length of time - a commercial organisation is probably going to be more effective at providing service but what commercial organisation would you trust to provide consistent service for 100 years? A Swiss bank perhaps? Governments of stable countries are obviously capable of this (cl…
The Royal Mint has existed for 1,100 years. That's pretty much the most stable government-owned business-like entity I can find. The Stora Kopparberg mining company has existed since it was granted a charter from King Magnus IV in 1347. A few banks tend to last for a long time [1]. Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena has existed for about 540 years. Beretta, the italian firearms company, has existed for 486 years (and ha…
Hudson's Bay Company is 342 years old and running.
Re: Amazon Glacier
#334Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree that showing the encryption key in the clear is not a serious security flaw but it's IMHO against best practice. Passwords and key are usually shown in an obscured form, usually with asterisks, and stored in the user or system keychain. You are absolutely right that the security value of these standard practices should not be overvalued but still … what else within the security framework of CrashPlan is not d…
There have been sound arguments made against obscuring password entry.
Those arguments are typically made from the wrong perspective. It's just so common that if you don't do it, your product will be perceived as insecure. And as long as actual security is not horrible, the perception of security is what drives sales, not the actual security.
Re: Amazon Glacier
#335Earlier quoted context omitted.
They have had a military coup within the last decade, not exactly a bastion of stability.
The Thai king is the longest-reigning current head of state, ascending the throne on 9 June 1946. Elizabeth II of England is 2nd, 6 February 1952. The oldest country (not government) is likely Vietnam (2897 BCE). Other contenders: Japan (660 BCE), China (221 BCE), Ethiopia (~800 BCE), or Iran (678 BCE). Few of today's modern states pre-date the 19th Century, many antedate World War II or the great de-colonialisation…
Isn't Egypt another contender for the oldest country?
Re: Amazon Glacier
#336Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Paying $12 to store a gigabyte of data for 100 years" I'm not sure what kind of organisation I'd actually trust to store data for that length of time - a commercial organisation is probably going to be more effective at providing service but what commercial organisation would you trust to provide consistent service for 100 years? A Swiss bank perhaps? Governments of stable countries are obviously capable of this (cl…
If you really want the organization to survive for a long term, you need to make it a religion. If you can figure out a way to convince a few dozen people every decade that the best way to glorify God is to isolate themselves off somewhere maintaining your archival data, you'll be set for centuries.
One could say monks have historically been the ones maintaining archival data.
Re: Amazon Glacier
#337I'm a long time user of backblaze, and I'm a big fan of the product - it does a great job of always making sure my working documents are backed up, particularly when I'm traveling overseas, and my laptop is more vulnerable to theft or damage. With that said - Backblaze is optimized for working documents - and the default "exclusion" list makes it clear they don't want to be backing up your "wab~,vmc,vhd,vo1,vo2,vsv,v…
I'm looking into supporting Glacier in Arq. It sure is cheap -- $10/month for a terabyte.
I'm a happy Arq customer today and I'd pay for an upgrade to Glacier! Longer term I'm sure you will have competitors on Glacier that you will be competing with so best to move sooner than later.
Re: Amazon Glacier
#338I just saw this and thought wow finally cheap mass storage. After reading the comments (and the Amazon Glacier web page) it's clear it's cheap archiving but not cheap retrieval.
Re: Amazon Glacier
#339Beware that retrieval fee! The retrieval fee for 3TB could be as high as $22,082 based on my reading of their FAQ [1]. It's not clear to me how they calculate the hourly retrieval rate. Is it based on how fast you download the data once it's available, how much data you request divided by how long it takes them to retrieve it (3.5-4.5 hours), or the size of the archives you request for retrieval in a given hour? This…
Former S3 employee here. I was on my way out of the company just after the storage engineering work was completed, before they had finalized the API design and pricing structure, so my POV may be slightly out of date, but I will say this: they're out to replace tape. No more custom build-outs with temperature-controlled rooms of tapes and robots and costly tech support.
If you're not an Iron Mountain customer, this product probably isn't for you. It wasn't built to back up your family photos and music collection.
Regarding other questions about transfer rates - using something like AWS Import/Export will have a limited impact. While the link between your device and the service will be much fatter, the reason Glacier is so cheap is because of the custom hardware. They've optimized for low-power, low-speed, which will lead to increased cost savings due to both energy savings and increased drive life. I'm not sure how much detail I can go into, but I will say that they've contracted a major hardware manufacturer to create custom low-RPM (and therefore low-power) hard drives that can programmatically be spun down. These custom HDs are put in custom racks with custom logic boards all designed to be very low-power. The upper limit of how much I/O they can perform is surprisingly low - only so many drives can be spun up to full speed on a given rack. I'm not sure how they stripe their data, so the perceived throughput may be higher based on parallel retrievals across racks, but if they're using the same erasure coding strategy that S3 uses, and writing those fragments sequentially, it doesn't matter - you'll still have to wait for the last usable fragment to be read.
I think this will be a definite game-changer for enterprise customers. Hopefully the rest of us will benefit indirectly - as large S3 customers move archival data to Glacier, S3 costs could go down.
Re: Amazon Glacier
#340Beware that retrieval fee! The retrieval fee for 3TB could be as high as $22,082 based on my reading of their FAQ [1]. It's not clear to me how they calculate the hourly retrieval rate. Is it based on how fast you download the data once it's available, how much data you request divided by how long it takes them to retrieve it (3.5-4.5 hours), or the size of the archives you request for retrieval in a given hour? This…
> It's not clear to me how they calculate the hourly retrieval rate. Probably based on the speed and the number of arms that the robot has that will grab the right tapes for you :-) I'm not joking.
[deleted]