5 ms·

I'd be interested to know, have you looked into reducing/eliminating bandwidth prices further for clients close to your network? It seems like you're with Unwir

by Veratyr 10y ago

I'd be interested to know, have you looked into reducing/eliminating bandwidth prices further for clients close to your network? It seems like you're with Unwired, which has heavy inbound traffic and peers at a number of facilities in the Bay Area. It'd be really interesting to know if you could, for example, offer free traffic to Linode, DigitalOcean or Vultr, all of which have offerings in the area and could help balance out Unwired's traffic flow (I think that's a thing ISPs care about). The big thing missing from B2 for me now, relative to the other big players, is the ability to process my data once it's stored with you. If I store my images in S3 for example, I can use EC2 to thumbnail them without paying anything for retrieval. At the moment I can't do that with B2 and it seems unlikely to make sense for you to build your own compute cloud but perhaps you can integrate with others.

cookiecaper 10y ago
B2 is a competitor of long-term storage solutions like Glacier or TarSnap, not virtualized storage like S3. It's meant to be almost 100% write-only. Basically, you pull your backups down in case of disaster.
- budmang 10y ago
  Backblaze has a backup service for laptops/desktops, but our B2 service is actually more like S3 - the data is available without delays or penalties for access. (Unlike Glacier.)
  - cookiecaper 10y ago
    Yeah, it's similar to Google Nearline or TarSnap in that unlike Glacier, the data can be read out instantly instead of waiting for Amazon to restore it off of a tape or whatever they do. The "penalty for access" is the download cost. However, my understanding is that B2 was intended for long-term storage and not everyday cloud storage. Is this understanding incorrect? Backblaze does take the position that B2 should be considered as a competitor for S3? Up to this point, my experience with B2 has been that they don't want to be the authoritative storage source for the data. I seem to recall reading that B2 should not be used as primary storage (though that was in beta days). In support discussions, a representative expressed surprise when it was implied that I may not have local copies of files that already exist on B2 (I do indeed have local copies, but it was beside the point) before confirming that yes, I would need to redownload and reupload to complete a rename.
    - brianwski 10y ago
      Brian from Backblaze here. > my understanding is that B2 was intended for long-term storage... Long term storage is a great use of B2, but it was never "intended" as anything other than the ability to reliably store blobs of data and retrieve them really fast whenever and how ever often you like. I suppose there are different use cases that work well for B2 and others that don't work well, but that is up for customers to decide, not Backblaze. > ... they [Backblaze?] don't want to be the authoritative storage source for the data Who told you that? Backblaze wants people to use B2 for whatever they want. Backblaze makes an AMAZINGLY GOOD authoritative storage source. > I would need to redownload and reupload to complete a rename Right now the B2 service does not include a "rename" function. If that would be useful to customers, we can add it? We collect customer requests and add them in the order that we have time and what gets the most customer votes.
      - cookiecaper 10y ago
        Thanks for clarifying. >Long term storage is a great use of B2, but it was never "intended" as anything other than the ability to reliably store blobs of data and retrieve them really fast whenever and how ever often you like. I suppose there are different use cases that work well for B2 and others that don't work well, but that is up for customers to decide, not Backblaze. I guess that the pricing structure of free uploads and expensive downloads is the main thing that caused it to be compared to Glacier and other long-term storage solutions like Nearline. Reducing the download cost is an attempt to get more people to see B2 as an S3 replacement, right? >Who told you that? Backblaze wants people to use B2 for whatever they want. Backblaze makes an AMAZINGLY GOOD authoritative storage source. Like I said, I must be recalling discussion from the time the beta was announced, and that such restrictions were shed post-beta. Did Backblaze ever expand into its promised second datacenter? >Right now the B2 service does not include a "rename" function. If that would be useful to customers, we can add it? We collect customer requests and add them in the order that we have time and what gets the most customer votes. Yes, this made me stop using B2 for all practical intents and purposes. It's such an easy thing that it doesn't seem like there's any reason it shouldn't be supported. Between the web UI's lack of pagination and the inability to rename a file to comply with virtual folders, the web interface is not usable.
budmang 10y ago
I would love to do this. Cross-connects aren't free, but they are certainly less expensive than going out across the Internet. And enabling compute/storage use cases by (possibly) partnering with other providers would be excellent. I'll reach out to a few of those compute providers and explore. Can you tell me more about how you use/would use cloud storage? (with or without compute)
- Veratyr 10y ago
  Currently I don't really use cloud storage, it's cheaper for me to colocate a 2U stuffed with disks and buy transit. Primarily though I store media. I have (for a home user) large amounts of high resolution (lossless audio, RAW images, high bitrate (even ProRes) video) media that I like to keep for archival and transcoding but don't need for playback. I want to store the original media somewhere safe and cheap but have the ability to transcode it to a format suitable for playback/streaming on demand. Actually it just occurred to me that it might be worth you talking to the folks at Plex (https://plex.tv https://plex.tv) about this too, as they're working on their Cloud product and need more places for their users to store media.
  - budmang 10y ago
    Got it. Transcoding & making image thumbnails are two common use cases we hear. Thanks.
  - jjeaff 10y ago
    If I was a storage company, I would consider Plex a hot potato and would stay far, far away. There is a reason Plex isn't building out their own storage and the reason isn't cost. It's because they know that 99% of all the media their customers handle is pirated content. At some point, Plex will become large enough to get on the radar of the MPAA and at that point, I assume they will go after the cloud storage providers.
    - Veratyr 10y ago
      I feel like it'd be the opposite. DMCA protects the storage provider as long as they're unaware that they're storing infringing content and Plex limits sharing enough that any infringement is unlikely to reach the MPAA/RIAA.
infogulch 10y ago
So you're asking for cheaper egress to specific cloud provider peering partners that offer compute. ?
- Veratyr 10y ago
  It doesn't need to be a specific provider, those were just examples. The idea is to have free traffic between Backblaze and someone that provides compute, so you can transform the data without fetching all of it. I suggested those in particular because I believe they're all in the SF bay area and should be present at one of Unwired's existing peering points. The reason I can't see traffic just being straight free for everyone is that for Backblaze to make traffic free, it needs to make arrangements with the providers to reduce costs (for example by connecting directly rather than through the internet).
loxias 10y ago
I would love this! Great idea. So far, B2 beats S3 on nearly every metric, with the exception that with S3 I can process data more cheaply with EC2. A crosspromotion deal between Linode and Backblaze would be fantastic.

by Veratyr 10y ago

cookiecaper 10y ago

B2 is a competitor of long-term storage solutions like Glacier or TarSnap, not virtualized storage like S3. It's meant to be almost 100% write-only. Basically, you pull your backups down in case of disaster.

budmang 10y ago
Backblaze has a backup service for laptops/desktops, but our B2 service is actually more like S3 - the data is available without delays or penalties for access. (Unlike Glacier.)
- cookiecaper 10y ago
  Yeah, it's similar to Google Nearline or TarSnap in that unlike Glacier, the data can be read out instantly instead of waiting for Amazon to restore it off of a tape or whatever they do. The "penalty for access" is the download cost. However, my understanding is that B2 was intended for long-term storage and not everyday cloud storage. Is this understanding incorrect? Backblaze does take the position that B2 should be considered as a competitor for S3? Up to this point, my experience with B2 has been that they don't want to be the authoritative storage source for the data. I seem to recall reading that B2 should not be used as primary storage (though that was in beta days). In support discussions, a representative expressed surprise when it was implied that I may not have local copies of files that already exist on B2 (I do indeed have local copies, but it was beside the point) before confirming that yes, I would need to redownload and reupload to complete a rename.
  - brianwski 10y ago
    Brian from Backblaze here. > my understanding is that B2 was intended for long-term storage... Long term storage is a great use of B2, but it was never "intended" as anything other than the ability to reliably store blobs of data and retrieve them really fast whenever and how ever often you like. I suppose there are different use cases that work well for B2 and others that don't work well, but that is up for customers to decide, not Backblaze. > ... they [Backblaze?] don't want to be the authoritative storage source for the data Who told you that? Backblaze wants people to use B2 for whatever they want. Backblaze makes an AMAZINGLY GOOD authoritative storage source. > I would need to redownload and reupload to complete a rename Right now the B2 service does not include a "rename" function. If that would be useful to customers, we can add it? We collect customer requests and add them in the order that we have time and what gets the most customer votes.
    - cookiecaper 10y ago
      Thanks for clarifying. >Long term storage is a great use of B2, but it was never "intended" as anything other than the ability to reliably store blobs of data and retrieve them really fast whenever and how ever often you like. I suppose there are different use cases that work well for B2 and others that don't work well, but that is up for customers to decide, not Backblaze. I guess that the pricing structure of free uploads and expensive downloads is the main thing that caused it to be compared to Glacier and other long-term storage solutions like Nearline. Reducing the download cost is an attempt to get more people to see B2 as an S3 replacement, right? >Who told you that? Backblaze wants people to use B2 for whatever they want. Backblaze makes an AMAZINGLY GOOD authoritative storage source. Like I said, I must be recalling discussion from the time the beta was announced, and that such restrictions were shed post-beta. Did Backblaze ever expand into its promised second datacenter? >Right now the B2 service does not include a "rename" function. If that would be useful to customers, we can add it? We collect customer requests and add them in the order that we have time and what gets the most customer votes. Yes, this made me stop using B2 for all practical intents and purposes. It's such an easy thing that it doesn't seem like there's any reason it shouldn't be supported. Between the web UI's lack of pagination and the inability to rename a file to comply with virtual folders, the web interface is not usable.

budmang 10y ago

I would love to do this. Cross-connects aren't free, but they are certainly less expensive than going out across the Internet. And enabling compute/storage use cases by (possibly) partnering with other providers would be excellent. I'll reach out to a few of those compute providers and explore. Can you tell me more about how you use/would use cloud storage? (with or without compute)

Veratyr 10y ago
Currently I don't really use cloud storage, it's cheaper for me to colocate a 2U stuffed with disks and buy transit. Primarily though I store media. I have (for a home user) large amounts of high resolution (lossless audio, RAW images, high bitrate (even ProRes) video) media that I like to keep for archival and transcoding but don't need for playback. I want to store the original media somewhere safe and cheap but have the ability to transcode it to a format suitable for playback/streaming on demand. Actually it just occurred to me that it might be worth you talking to the folks at Plex (https://plex.tv https://plex.tv) about this too, as they're working on their Cloud product and need more places for their users to store media.
- budmang 10y ago
  Got it. Transcoding & making image thumbnails are two common use cases we hear. Thanks.
- jjeaff 10y ago
  If I was a storage company, I would consider Plex a hot potato and would stay far, far away. There is a reason Plex isn't building out their own storage and the reason isn't cost. It's because they know that 99% of all the media their customers handle is pirated content. At some point, Plex will become large enough to get on the radar of the MPAA and at that point, I assume they will go after the cloud storage providers.
  - Veratyr 10y ago
    I feel like it'd be the opposite. DMCA protects the storage provider as long as they're unaware that they're storing infringing content and Plex limits sharing enough that any infringement is unlikely to reach the MPAA/RIAA.

infogulch 10y ago

So you're asking for cheaper egress to specific cloud provider peering partners that offer compute. ?

Veratyr 10y ago
It doesn't need to be a specific provider, those were just examples. The idea is to have free traffic between Backblaze and someone that provides compute, so you can transform the data without fetching all of it. I suggested those in particular because I believe they're all in the SF bay area and should be present at one of Unwired's existing peering points. The reason I can't see traffic just being straight free for everyone is that for Backblaze to make traffic free, it needs to make arrangements with the providers to reduce costs (for example by connecting directly rather than through the internet).

loxias 10y ago

I would love this! Great idea. So far, B2 beats S3 on nearly every metric, with the exception that with S3 I can process data more cheaply with EC2. A crosspromotion deal between Linode and Backblaze would be fantastic.