4 ms·
Colin, Any interest or thoughts about adding Google Cloud Storage as an option vs AWS S3? S3 (us-east-1) runs $0.023 per GB. Google Cloud Storage in a single
by nodesocket 10y ago
Colin,
Any interest or thoughts about adding Google Cloud Storage as an option vs AWS S3?
S3 (us-east-1) runs $0.023 per GB. Google Cloud Storage in a single region runs slightly less at $0.02 per GB.
Howerver, bandwidth may be the biggest cost factor for you not storage.
- cperciva 10y agoThe price difference between S3 and Google Cloud Storage isn't enough to make a meaningful difference, particularly since I'd need to set up server code in Google Cloud to manage it. Bandwidth isn't a huge cost; but the server which keeps track of where all the bits are in S3 and shuffles them around is surprisingly expensive.
- nodesocket 10y agoCurious what AWS instance type you are using for that machine that keeps track of all the Tarsnap bits? I'm guessing it is highly available, so multiple instances of that type?
- boulos 10y agoDisclosure: I work on Google Cloud (and love the idea of Tarsnap, including the picodollars). What about if you were to age things into Nearline and Coldline using lifecycle policies? Also, someone claims you do multiple regions, which our "default" multiregional does at less than half the cost of S3. Admittedly we only recently (finally!) added per-object storage classes. But unless I misunderstand how your blocks work in tarsnap, wouldn't that be amenable to having some large portion as Nearline and possibly even Coldline? If not, I'd love to understand! (contact info in my profile).