3 ms·

If this is yours, I recommend adopting some sort of inverse relationship between file size and retention time. 0x0 does this and I think it makes a lot of sens

If this is yours, I recommend adopting some sort of inverse relationship between file size and retention time. 0x0 does this and I think it makes a lot of sense: https://0x0.st/ https://0x0.st/ retention = min_age + (-max_age + min_age) * pow((file_size / max_size - 1), 3) days 365 | \ | \ | \ | \ | \ | \ | .. | \ 197.5 | ----------..------------------------------------------- | .. | \ | .. | ... | .. | ... | .... | ...... 30 | .................... 0 256 512 MiB

crazygringo 8y ago
Why? I don't see what the correlation is between a user's file size and how long the user will need it to remain. Generally people use these services to host a file for around the time it takes someone to check their e-mail/ticket/etc. to download the item -- hopefully within a day, usually a couple days, worst-case scenario a week. The time-cutoff is based on human behavior. Plus, it's too much mental overhead for a user to have to worry that each file uploaded lasts for a different amount of time.
- lalala1995 8y ago
  I think it is to cut the host's cost on disk ? Not necessary for the benefit of user.
- dahart 8y ago
  For a host providing a free service that they have to pay actual money to run, and having a finite & non-advertised limit on disk space, it makes sense to put a heavier mental price on large files, so that a 1GB upload actually does feel heavier to the user than a 1KB upload.
- darkpuma 8y ago
  > Why? The current policy of 25GB for seven days is very generous, but I fear it will prove unsustainable.
leet 8y ago
I can totally write a script to divide my large files into smaller parts before uploading. That way I will get unlimited storage?
- darkpuma 8y ago
  > That way I will get unlimited storage? No. That way fill up his hard drive, break the server and ruin it for everybody. Don't be that guy.
  - blotter_paper 8y ago
    I think GP gets that, and is pointing out a potential problem. Your solution of not being an asshole works for small groups, but not the entire internet.
ltc5505 8y ago
Did you type this graph out by hand?

crazygringo 8y ago

Why? I don't see what the correlation is between a user's file size and how long the user will need it to remain. Generally people use these services to host a file for around the time it takes someone to check their e-mail/ticket/etc. to download the item -- hopefully within a day, usually a couple days, worst-case scenario a week. The time-cutoff is based on human behavior. Plus, it's too much mental overhead for a user to have to worry that each file uploaded lasts for a different amount of time.

lalala1995 8y ago
I think it is to cut the host's cost on disk ? Not necessary for the benefit of user.
dahart 8y ago
For a host providing a free service that they have to pay actual money to run, and having a finite & non-advertised limit on disk space, it makes sense to put a heavier mental price on large files, so that a 1GB upload actually does feel heavier to the user than a 1KB upload.
darkpuma 8y ago
> Why? The current policy of 25GB for seven days is very generous, but I fear it will prove unsustainable.

leet 8y ago

I can totally write a script to divide my large files into smaller parts before uploading. That way I will get unlimited storage?

darkpuma 8y ago
> That way I will get unlimited storage? No. That way fill up his hard drive, break the server and ruin it for everybody. Don't be that guy.
- blotter_paper 8y ago
  I think GP gets that, and is pointing out a potential problem. Your solution of not being an asshole works for small groups, but not the entire internet.

ltc5505 8y ago

Did you type this graph out by hand?