3 ms·
Interesting pricing: Base $5/month for 250GB storage and 1TB outbound traffic. No cost for requests. Additional storage is $0.02/GB/month and additional outboun
by riobard 9y ago
Interesting pricing: Base $5/month for 250GB storage and 1TB outbound traffic. No cost for requests. Additional storage is $0.02/GB/month and additional outbound traffic is $0.01/GB.
Compared to BackBlaze B2: $0.005/GB/month for storage and $0.02/GB for traffic, plus tiered API call fees (see https://www.backblaze.com/b2/cloud-storage-pricing.html https://www.backblaze.com/b2/cloud-storage-pricing.html)
So Spaces is better for serving assets (lower traffic cost) and B2 is better for archiving data (lower storage cost).
- minxomat 9y agoActually I'd say that managed OpenStack Swift is a better solution than B2, if only marginally more expensive. Take e.g. OVH's Swift pricing[1], which is $0.011 per GB (stored and outgoing). I found Swifts latency (at least on the OVH cluster, with the OVH CDN) to be much better than B2. Swift also satisfies my paranoia about having a remote storage system I could setup on-prem. Also, more storage regions, much better network infra, actual access to software running on the cluster (Swift, not some proprietary API). YMMV [1] - https://www.ovh.com/us/public-cloud/storage/object-storage/ https://www.ovh.com/us/public-cloud/storage/object-storage/