4 ms·

> The only reason their outbound prices are so high is to keep people from getting out in a cost effective manner. This doesn't make any sense. Getting out is

by fooker 8y ago

> The only reason their outbound prices are so high is to keep people from getting out in a cost effective manner. This doesn't make any sense. Getting out is a one time operation, vs paying a higher recurring fee.

scrollaway 8y ago
Getting out is not necessarily a one-time operation. It can mean switching some services to a competing offer, even just for an evaluation period. So for example, say, you're using a bunch of hosted AWS services and Google's BigQuery.
jessaustin 8y ago
Lots of data must be kept for e.g. 7 years yet is never used. Maybe that should never have been in AWS in the first place, but once it's there this is a factor.
- fooker 8y ago
  Amazon will happily ship you a disk : https://aws.amazon.com/snowball/disk/details/ https://aws.amazon.com/snowball/disk/details/
  - jessaustin 8y ago
    That's not free either.
    - NathanKP 8y ago
      You can get an 80 TB Snowball to use for 10 days for $250, and pay a minor shipping charge to get it to and from the AWS datacenter. That's not free but its cheap enough that it should be a tiny decimal point percentage of the value of the 80 TB of business data you can fit on the Snowball. And yes Snowball goes both ways: you can get data into AWS or out of AWS.
      - jessaustin 8y ago
        Thanks, that's great info. Hopefully the snowball is considered to be in the same "availability zone"?
      - tw04 8y ago
        And how many businesses have 80TB of valuable data that is valuable when it's offline for potentially weeks while it's moved onto the snowball, shipped, taken off of the snowball, and then converted into a usable format onsite? Ignoring the fact you lose all metadata transferring via snowball and any ACLs depending on the type of data and where you pulled it from. You can't pull from anything BUT S3 either. So that database? Sorry, online. The Glacier archive? Going to have to rehydrate it first. The $250 is a rounding error for sure, but not on the cost of the data, on the cost of restoring the data. Even S3 itself you're ignoring the fact that you've got $2,500 in transfer fees alone on that 80TB.
pmart123 8y ago
In theory, but this would not be true in practice. The cost is meant to make Redshift the default data warehouse versus that “cool new service” over there as an example. Each one of these types of decisions creates more AWS team expertise, and a harder decision to migrate to another service.

by fooker 8y ago

scrollaway 8y ago

Getting out is not necessarily a one-time operation. It can mean switching some services to a competing offer, even just for an evaluation period. So for example, say, you're using a bunch of hosted AWS services and Google's BigQuery.

jessaustin 8y ago

Lots of data must be kept for e.g. 7 years yet is never used. Maybe that should never have been in AWS in the first place, but once it's there this is a factor.

fooker 8y ago
Amazon will happily ship you a disk : https://aws.amazon.com/snowball/disk/details/ https://aws.amazon.com/snowball/disk/details/
- jessaustin 8y ago
  That's not free either.
  - NathanKP 8y ago
    You can get an 80 TB Snowball to use for 10 days for $250, and pay a minor shipping charge to get it to and from the AWS datacenter. That's not free but its cheap enough that it should be a tiny decimal point percentage of the value of the 80 TB of business data you can fit on the Snowball. And yes Snowball goes both ways: you can get data into AWS or out of AWS.
    - jessaustin 8y ago
      Thanks, that's great info. Hopefully the snowball is considered to be in the same "availability zone"?
    - tw04 8y ago
      And how many businesses have 80TB of valuable data that is valuable when it's offline for potentially weeks while it's moved onto the snowball, shipped, taken off of the snowball, and then converted into a usable format onsite? Ignoring the fact you lose all metadata transferring via snowball and any ACLs depending on the type of data and where you pulled it from. You can't pull from anything BUT S3 either. So that database? Sorry, online. The Glacier archive? Going to have to rehydrate it first. The $250 is a rounding error for sure, but not on the cost of the data, on the cost of restoring the data. Even S3 itself you're ignoring the fact that you've got $2,500 in transfer fees alone on that 80TB.

pmart123 8y ago

In theory, but this would not be true in practice. The cost is meant to make Redshift the default data warehouse versus that “cool new service” over there as an example. Each one of these types of decisions creates more AWS team expertise, and a harder decision to migrate to another service.