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

Supabase Storage now supports the S3 protocol

supabase.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 194 posts

Re: Supabase Storage now supports the S3 protocol

#41

Post by [deleted] »

kiwicopple wrote: post #35
jonplackett wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. I am so impressed with SB. It’s like you read my mind and then make what I’ll need before I realise. (This is not a paid promotion)

>like you read my mind we receive a lot of community feedback and ultimately there are only a few "primitives" developers need to solve 90% of their problems I think we're inching closer to the complete set of primitives which can be used to combine into second-order primitives (eg: queues/search/maps can all be "wrappers" around the primitives we already provide)

[deleted]

Re: Supabase Storage now supports the S3 protocol

#42

Post by kiwicopple »

yoavm wrote: post #36

This looks great! How easy is it to self host Supabase? Is it more like "we're open-source, but good luck getting this deployed!", or can someone really build on Supabase and if things get a little too expensive it's easy enough to self-host the whole thing and just switch over? I wonder if people are doing that.

self-hosting docs are here: https://supabase.com/docs/guides/self-hosting/docker

And a 5-min demo video with Digital Ocean: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqiQKRKsfZE&embeds_referring...

Anyone who is familiar with basic server management skills will have no problem self-hosting. every tool in the supabase stack[0] is a docker image and works in isolation. If you just want to use this Storage Engine, it's on docker-hub (supabase/storage-api). Example with MinIO: https://github.com/supabase/storage/blob/master/docker-compo...

[0] architecture: https://supabase.com/docs/guides/getting-started/architectur...

Re: Supabase Storage now supports the S3 protocol

#43

Post by kiwicopple »

devjume wrote: post #37

This is great news. Now I can utilize any CDN provider that supports S3. Like bunny.net [1] which has image optimization, just like Supabase does but with better pricing and features. I have been developing with Supabase past two months. I would say there are still some rough corners in general and some basic features missing. Example Supabase storage has no direct support for metadata [2][3]. Overall I like the laun…

> I can utilize any CDN provider that supports S3. Like bunny.net

Bunny is a great product. I'm glad this release makes that possible for you and I imagine this was one of the reasons the rest of the community wanted it too

> But more attention to basic features and little details

This is what we spend most of our time doing, but you won't hear about it because they aren't HN-worthy.

> no direct support for metadata

Fabrizio tells me this is next on the list. I understand it's frustrating, but there is a workaround - store metadata in the postgres database (I know, not ideal but still usable). We're getting through requests as fast as we can.

Re: Supabase Storage now supports the S3 protocol

#44

Post by pelagicAustral »

fenos wrote: post #40
nextaccountic wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh. So this is like, S3 on top of S3? That's interesting.

Yes indeed! I would call it S3 on steroids! Currently, it happens to be S3 to S3, but you could write an adapter, let's say GoogleCloudStorage and it will become S3 -> GoogleCloudStorage, or any other type of underline Storage. Additionally, we provide a special way of authenticating to Supabase S3 using the SessionToken, which allows you to scope S3 operations to your users specific access control https://supabase.c…

What about for second tier cloud providers like Linode, Vultr or UpCloud, they all offer S3 compatible object storage, will I need to write an adaptor for these or will it work just fine in lieu of their S3 compatibility?

Re: Supabase Storage now supports the S3 protocol

#45

Post by simonbarker87 »

Supabase is great and I’ve used it for a number of projects over the years both with a backend alongside it or direct from the client with RLS.

There are some weird edges (well really just faff) around auth with the JS library but if nothing else they are by far the cheapest hosted SQL offering I can find so any faff you don’t want to deal with there’s an excellent database right there to allow you to roll your own (assuming you have a backend server alongside it)

Re: Supabase Storage now supports the S3 protocol

#46

Post by f18m »

jonplackett wrote: post #4

Dear supabase. Please don’t get bought out by anyone and ruined. I’ve built too many websites with a supabase backend now to go back.

Never used Supabase before but I'm very much comfortable with their underlying stack. I use a combination of postgres, PostgREST, PLv8 and Auth0 to achieve nearly the same thing.

Re: Supabase Storage now supports the S3 protocol

#47

Post by Rapzid »

fenos wrote: post #24
JoshTriplett wrote: post #23

You specifically say "for large files". What's your bandwidth and latency like for small files (e.g. 20-20480 bytes), and how does it compare to raw S3's bandwidth and latency for small files?

You can think of the Storage product as an upload server that sits in front of S3. Generally, you would want to place an upload server to accept uploads from your customers, that is because you want to do some sort of file validation, access control or anything else once the file is uploaded. The nice thing is that we run Storage within the same AWS network, so the upload latency is as small as it can be. In terms of…

> Generally, you would want to place an upload server to accept uploads from your customers

A common pattern on AWS is to not handle the upload on your own servers. Checks are made ahead of time, conditions baked into the signed URL, and processing is handled after the fact via bucket events.

Re: Supabase Storage now supports the S3 protocol

#48

Post by fenos »

pelagicAustral wrote: post #44
fenos wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes indeed! I would call it S3 on steroids! Currently, it happens to be S3 to S3, but you could write an adapter, let's say GoogleCloudStorage and it will become S3 -> GoogleCloudStorage, or any other type of underline Storage. Additionally, we provide a special way of authenticating to Supabase S3 using the SessionToken, which allows you to scope S3 operations to your users specific access control https://supabase.c…

What about for second tier cloud providers like Linode, Vultr or UpCloud, they all offer S3 compatible object storage, will I need to write an adaptor for these or will it work just fine in lieu of their S3 compatibility?

Our S3 Driver is compatible with any S3 Compatible object Storage so you don’t have to write one :)

Re: Supabase Storage now supports the S3 protocol

#50

Post by fenos »

Rapzid wrote: post #47
fenos wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can think of the Storage product as an upload server that sits in front of S3. Generally, you would want to place an upload server to accept uploads from your customers, that is because you want to do some sort of file validation, access control or anything else once the file is uploaded. The nice thing is that we run Storage within the same AWS network, so the upload latency is as small as it can be. In terms of…

> Generally, you would want to place an upload server to accept uploads from your customers A common pattern on AWS is to not handle the upload on your own servers. Checks are made ahead of time, conditions baked into the signed URL, and processing is handled after the fact via bucket events.

That is also a common pattern I agree, both ways are fine if the upload server is optimised accordingly :)
Post reply on HN