3 ms·
This seems like a smart response to Google Cloud Nearline Storage. Slightly more expensive, but with the S3->IA->Glacier lifecycle mapping the ultimate costs m
by venning 11y ago
This seems like a smart response to Google Cloud Nearline Storage. Slightly more expensive, but with the S3->IA->Glacier lifecycle mapping the ultimate costs may be lower with AWS, certainly the flexibility will be there.
Amazon, staring at its mighty armory, goes on the hunt for a tiny chink to repair.
- obulpathi 11y agoYep, looks like AWS is catching up with Google in areas like these (Nearline, Container Engine).
- boulos 11y agoJust a clarification the difference in cost-per-byte stored is 25% (1.25 cents vs 1). The rates are all so small it's hard to see that but when you say $12.50 vs $10 per TiB/month, I think that makes it more "visible". As you get into the PiB range ($10k/month on Nearline) and then consider storage for a year you've got a difference of $30k/year/PiB. For individuals doing a small backup even 25% isn't huge in absolute numbers, but in the petabyte range it matters a lot. Disclaimer: I work on Compute Engine (and not GCS or Nearline).