3 ms·
I believe a team of one or two talented individuals can build something that scales well and that will save a HUGE amount of money once you get into any signifi
by jhartmann 10y ago
I believe a team of one or two talented individuals can build something that scales well and that will save a HUGE amount of money once you get into any significant portion of a petabyte with your data. One or two months of S3's list price can easily pay for the cost of hardware. You can easily go with whitebox hardware from say supermicro, and colocation is SOOOO much less expensive. If your not storing a significant portion of a petabyte, its going to probably be cheaper development wise to just use S3. You also don't need to build something as complex as their system, they have to scale to exabytes. Unless you plan to hit that scale immediately or have that much data, you can build for something less complex and smaller to start.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- toomuchtodo 10y agohttps://www.backblaze.com/b2/storage-pod.html https://www.backblaze.com/b2/storage-pod.html
- james_cowling 10y agoJust a caveat I'll add is that you have to work really very hard to build a system with equivalent/better durability and availability guarantees as the big cloud storage providers. It's typically not possible to be significantly cheaper with these same guarantees unless you're at large scale with well-established supply chain organizations, etc. Of course if you don't need 11+ nines of durability or multi-datacenter redundancy, or if you have lower access requirements, then you can exploit those reduced requirements to your advantage.
- james_cowling 10y agoTo be clear, we do need those durability and availability guarantees :) We just benefit from our very-large scale and close alignment between hardware and software to tailor our infrastructure to our workloads.