3 ms·

Have you considered cloudflair?

toomuchtodo 7y ago
Backblaze B2 + Cloudflare = free outbound transfer (bandwidth alliance). Making objects in S3 publicly available and then complaining about their extortionate bandwidth charges is...silly.
- julien_c 7y ago
  I had intended to look into Cloudflare before but didn't get a chance. Looks like it's a good time now!
- joecot 7y ago
  Backblaze B2 + Cloudflare would be a perfect combination for hosting a static site. Unfortunately there's no way to map a Backblaze bucket to a domain, so even if you use cloudflare to point www.mydomain.com to it your files still show up at www.mydomain.com/path/to/bucket. But it certainly works if you need to CDN a bunch of large files.
  - jrullman 7y ago
    You can use Cloudflare Workers to rewrite the path.
    - zenexer 7y ago
      Those get fairly expensive if you have a lot of requests. Page rules are free if you only need a few, though.
      - joecot 7y ago
        3 pages rules are free. You need at least 2 page rules per website you want to use with Backblaze and Cloudflare, and that's for bare minimum workability. For a commercial company paying $5-10 a month to save TBs of bandwidth via Backblaze & Cloudflare is a no brainer. It's just unfortunately not very workable for small projects. Github Pages works with Cloudflare for static sites just fine though.
- reitzensteinm 7y ago
  If you try to serve a petabyte of binary data a month through Cloudflare, they're going to shut you down. S3 is very expensive, but averaging 4 gigabits 24x7 is not going to be cheap anywhere.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - parliament32 7y ago
    >averaging 4 gigabits 24x7 is not going to be cheap anywhere A normal upstream (if you were in a colo or some sort of DC) will charge you about $0.50 per meg. So, 4gbps would cost you... $200/mo. [1] I think people don't realize just how much more expensive IaaS providers are. We're literally talking orders of magnitude. [1] https://blog.telegeography.com/outlook-for-ip-transit-prices-in-2018 https://blog.telegeography.com/outlook-for-ip-transit-prices...
    - reitzensteinm 7y ago
      $2000, it seems like you dropped a zero. And you're presumably going to need some burst capacity, so call it $4k for a 2:1 ratio if you care about not throttling at peak times. The big cloud providers are very expensive, but you're getting impeccable bandwidth. Low packet loss, burst what you want even in peak times, fast transit worldwide, minimal variability. What most people actually don't realize is that they're making that tradeoff implicitly. You're not being ripped off if you need all of these things, but if it's overkill you can get much cheaper bandwidth elsewhere.
- qes 7y ago
  Cloudflare will cut you off and require a paid plan before you get to 1/10th this amount of egress.
  - toomuchtodo 7y ago
    Still cheaper than AWS!
stjohnswarts 7y ago
Nobody is going to regularly let you have 45 terabytes of data for free. It's swamping them, especially relative to other users.
- SXX 7y ago
  > Nobody is going to regularly let you have 45 terabytes of data for free. You can still use a few dedicated servers on Hetzner though. They'll easily let you serve 200TB / month from each server for $100. It's obviously not comparable to proper CDN though, but it's does work for many companies.

Backblaze B2 + Cloudflare = free outbound transfer (bandwidth alliance). Making objects in S3 publicly available and then complaining about their extortionate bandwidth charges is...silly.

julien_c 7y ago
I had intended to look into Cloudflare before but didn't get a chance. Looks like it's a good time now!
joecot 7y ago
Backblaze B2 + Cloudflare would be a perfect combination for hosting a static site. Unfortunately there's no way to map a Backblaze bucket to a domain, so even if you use cloudflare to point www.mydomain.com to it your files still show up at www.mydomain.com/path/to/bucket. But it certainly works if you need to CDN a bunch of large files.
- jrullman 7y ago
  You can use Cloudflare Workers to rewrite the path.
  - zenexer 7y ago
    Those get fairly expensive if you have a lot of requests. Page rules are free if you only need a few, though.
    - joecot 7y ago
      3 pages rules are free. You need at least 2 page rules per website you want to use with Backblaze and Cloudflare, and that's for bare minimum workability. For a commercial company paying $5-10 a month to save TBs of bandwidth via Backblaze & Cloudflare is a no brainer. It's just unfortunately not very workable for small projects. Github Pages works with Cloudflare for static sites just fine though.
reitzensteinm 7y ago
If you try to serve a petabyte of binary data a month through Cloudflare, they're going to shut you down. S3 is very expensive, but averaging 4 gigabits 24x7 is not going to be cheap anywhere.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- parliament32 7y ago
  >averaging 4 gigabits 24x7 is not going to be cheap anywhere A normal upstream (if you were in a colo or some sort of DC) will charge you about $0.50 per meg. So, 4gbps would cost you... $200/mo. [1] I think people don't realize just how much more expensive IaaS providers are. We're literally talking orders of magnitude. [1] https://blog.telegeography.com/outlook-for-ip-transit-prices-in-2018 https://blog.telegeography.com/outlook-for-ip-transit-prices...
  - reitzensteinm 7y ago
    $2000, it seems like you dropped a zero. And you're presumably going to need some burst capacity, so call it $4k for a 2:1 ratio if you care about not throttling at peak times. The big cloud providers are very expensive, but you're getting impeccable bandwidth. Low packet loss, burst what you want even in peak times, fast transit worldwide, minimal variability. What most people actually don't realize is that they're making that tradeoff implicitly. You're not being ripped off if you need all of these things, but if it's overkill you can get much cheaper bandwidth elsewhere.
qes 7y ago
Cloudflare will cut you off and require a paid plan before you get to 1/10th this amount of egress.
- toomuchtodo 7y ago
  Still cheaper than AWS!

stjohnswarts 7y ago

Nobody is going to regularly let you have 45 terabytes of data for free. It's swamping them, especially relative to other users.

SXX 7y ago
> Nobody is going to regularly let you have 45 terabytes of data for free. You can still use a few dedicated servers on Hetzner though. They'll easily let you serve 200TB / month from each server for $100. It's obviously not comparable to proper CDN though, but it's does work for many companies.