4 ms·

In a previous HN post [1] where someone wrote up how to use B2 as an image host, the Cloudflare CEO chimed in and addressed rule 2.8 specifically, saying if Clo

In a previous HN post [1] where someone wrote up how to use B2 as an image host, the Cloudflare CEO chimed in and addressed rule 2.8 specifically, saying if Cloudflare workers are used for URL prettifying and redirecting, a different ToS is applied and that use-case would be fine. Does that mean your video use-case would also be fine? I have no idea. An HN comment from the CEO doesn't seem like it would hold up if Cloudflare suddenly shut down your free account. I'd love for Cloudfront to officially clarify the limits of the Cloudfront/B2 alliance in terms of external traffic. The confounding issue here is that B2, as a storage service, is not really intended for "serving web pages and websites" — it's for larger files, binaries, etc. — and therefore any traffic from B2 going through Cloudfront is sort of de facto in violation of 2.8. [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20790857 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20790857

brianwski 6y ago
Disclaimer: I work at Backblaze so I'm biased. :-) > B2, as a storage service, is not really intended for "serving web pages and websites" — it's for larger files, binaries, etc It might be missing a couple features (which is a pet peeve of mine) but we SURELY intend for it to be used for serving web pages. That's one of the largest differences between "Backblaze Personal Backup" (our original product line) and Backblaze B2. The largest parts of the redesign/refit when we originally did B2 was around the concept of what we call "Friendly URLs" (web page names, folder names) instead of just ugly 82 character hexadecimal file names like Backblaze Personal Backup stores all your files in. For full disclosure, Backblaze B2 isn't a great "hosting" solution for something like WordPress because we lack two or three things, one of which is comically easy to fix and I keep trying to convince everyone to do it. The issue is URLs that end in a "/" (trailing slash) basically need to "guess" that after that is an ".html" or ".php" or whatever. So the URL: https://f001.backblazeb2.com/file/ski-epic-c/full/2015_scotland_will_macdonald_birthday_in_duns_castle/ https://f001.backblazeb2.com/file/ski-epic-c/full/2015_scotl... does not work, but the URL: https://f001.backblazeb2.com/file/ski-epic-c/full/2015_scotland_will_macdonald_birthday_in_duns_castle/index.html https://f001.backblazeb2.com/file/ski-epic-c/full/2015_scotl... does work. All modern web servers do this automatically filling in of the "index.html", but it is missing from Backblaze B2 currently. And it would take just a day or two for one of our developers to fix it. And dang it, I'm going to get it done one of these days.
- mahesh_rm 6y ago
  Please be inspired by how Netlify handles url rewriting through their netlify.toml file, in doing so, if it will be possible. :-)
- john-shaffer 6y ago
  S3's use of separate servers for website hosting is actually very sensible. Options like usage of index.html and error.html only apply on the website servers and won't cause any surprises for people using the service as a key-object store. That said, I would absolutely not consider using B2 without support for index.html, error.html, and Website-Redirect-Location.
  - erichocean 6y ago
    You can trivially use Cloudflare Workers to implement that functionality on top of B2.
Dylan16807 6y ago
Sounds like workers are fine in general, especially on the non-free tier that only increases the budget by $5 a month. That covers 10 million requests, which could each be 10MB chunks, or 512MB cached files, or possibly larger. (A raw mp4 needs about 3 requests to start plus one per seek.) But I wouldn't be surprised if that doesn't scale to enormous amounts of data.

brianwski 6y ago

Disclaimer: I work at Backblaze so I'm biased. :-) > B2, as a storage service, is not really intended for "serving web pages and websites" — it's for larger files, binaries, etc It might be missing a couple features (which is a pet peeve of mine) but we SURELY intend for it to be used for serving web pages. That's one of the largest differences between "Backblaze Personal Backup" (our original product line) and Backblaze B2. The largest parts of the redesign/refit when we originally did B2 was around the concept of what we call "Friendly URLs" (web page names, folder names) instead of just ugly 82 character hexadecimal file names like Backblaze Personal Backup stores all your files in. For full disclosure, Backblaze B2 isn't a great "hosting" solution for something like WordPress because we lack two or three things, one of which is comically easy to fix and I keep trying to convince everyone to do it. The issue is URLs that end in a "/" (trailing slash) basically need to "guess" that after that is an ".html" or ".php" or whatever. So the URL: https://f001.backblazeb2.com/file/ski-epic-c/full/2015_scotland_will_macdonald_birthday_in_duns_castle/ https://f001.backblazeb2.com/file/ski-epic-c/full/2015_scotl... does not work, but the URL: https://f001.backblazeb2.com/file/ski-epic-c/full/2015_scotland_will_macdonald_birthday_in_duns_castle/index.html https://f001.backblazeb2.com/file/ski-epic-c/full/2015_scotl... does work. All modern web servers do this automatically filling in of the "index.html", but it is missing from Backblaze B2 currently. And it would take just a day or two for one of our developers to fix it. And dang it, I'm going to get it done one of these days.

mahesh_rm 6y ago
Please be inspired by how Netlify handles url rewriting through their netlify.toml file, in doing so, if it will be possible. :-)
john-shaffer 6y ago
S3's use of separate servers for website hosting is actually very sensible. Options like usage of index.html and error.html only apply on the website servers and won't cause any surprises for people using the service as a key-object store. That said, I would absolutely not consider using B2 without support for index.html, error.html, and Website-Redirect-Location.
- erichocean 6y ago
  You can trivially use Cloudflare Workers to implement that functionality on top of B2.

Dylan16807 6y ago

Sounds like workers are fine in general, especially on the non-free tier that only increases the budget by $5 a month. That covers 10 million requests, which could each be 10MB chunks, or 512MB cached files, or possibly larger. (A raw mp4 needs about 3 requests to start plus one per seek.) But I wouldn't be surprised if that doesn't scale to enormous amounts of data.