4 ms·
That's possibly a way to trick the system, but storing 63.3 GB in S3 would cost OP less than 2$ for standard availability and less than 1$ for reduced availabil
by rakoo 11y ago
That's possibly a way to trick the system, but storing 63.3 GB in S3 would cost OP less than 2$ for standard availability and less than 1$ for reduced availability, not counting request costs (which are not as surprising as the hidden costs in question here). At this scale you should just store it in S3 and be done with it.
- captain_jamira 11y agosure, I wasn't intending to suggest this as a good premeditated maneuver, but there are probably other individuals out there who have found themselves in a similar position to the OP and considering their predicament. If you've gotten into Glacier for the wrong reason, you may already be in the trap, and you can quickly rip yourself free and take a bunch of skin, spend almost 2 years ever so gently prying yourself free, or maybe a third way. That's my angle here. Also, traps don't have to be laid for someone to feel like he's in one, so I'm not putting that on AWS. The cheapest way out seems to be to just grab 5%/month over 20 months, but that's a lot of sustained effort and contact with the service. So I could see a trick like this as a potential middle ground, at three months and ~$30 according to previous comment's details.