4 ms·
They're both difficult to grok but for different reasons. (Well, the same underlying reason - bandwidth - just accounted for differently). Glacier, as the art
by onethumb 11y ago
They're both difficult to grok but for different reasons. (Well, the same underlying reason - bandwidth - just accounted for differently).
Glacier, as the article points out, is difficult to grok because there are provisioned bandwidth costs.
Nearline is difficult to grok because it simply caps your bandwidth at 4 MB/s per TB stored. It starts at 1 MB/s.
Basically, both are optimized to make retrieval slow and/or expensive because the cost optimizations they're doing internally are incentivizing very cold data, very big data, or both.
- boulos 11y agoNote that with "on-demand I/O" you can basically remove this I/O throttle (best effort though) at an increased cost. Nearline is still cheaper than dealing with glacier (or even S3 Infrequent Access) particularly for small files. Disclaimer: I work on Compute Engine (GCE) but not Cloud Storage (GCS).
- vacri 11y ago>Glacier, as the article points out, is difficult to grok because there are provisioned bandwidth costs. It does go against their slogan "only pay for what you use", though. You're not using that 15GB/hour for 744 hours, and haven't explicitly selected provisioned IOPs.
- bonzini 11y ago> It starts at 1 MB/s. Not a problem all you can get is a crappy 8 Mbps ADSL. Oh well, let me whine... ;)