9 ms·
I'd be curious what the TCO is when factoring in storage. i.e. What is replacing S3 for data storage in the colo setup?
by mbell 8y ago
I'd be curious what the TCO is when factoring in storage. i.e. What is replacing S3 for data storage in the colo setup?
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- secabeen 8y agoThat system has slots for 16 2.5" drives in the back. I'd guess they can buy whatever commodity drive/SSD they want, and store the data there. Even throwing some cycles and memory at ZFS, the cost is small compared to the rest of the box. You'll need additional off-site backup, but that's starting to get out of the scope of the article.
- mbell 8y agoI don't think tossing 16 SSDs into a single enclosure is a fair comparison with S3. I also think that storage is absolutely in scope for an article like this.
- vidarh 8y agoTrue, for most workloads 16 SSDs in a single enclosure will be far faster and more efficient, but will require offsite backups. If you need redundant blob storage, pretty much every colo providers has solutions, and most of them are going to be cheaper than S3. Worst case you can use S3, and then need to factor in the bandwidth cost difference.
- secabeen 8y agoYep. Amazon even offers the Storage Gateway appliance to facilitate these workflows.
- ec109685 8y agoYou can still use s3, even if you aren’t in aws.