4 ms·

Curious about the cost. Does that already include manpower and various acquisition cost of constructing their internal network (hardware, fiber link between sit

by janjim 6y ago

Curious about the cost. Does that already include manpower and various acquisition cost of constructing their internal network (hardware, fiber link between site)? I guess the biggest downside is the speed of scaling that they can do. As it is limited by how fast they can purchase and install new storage device. But with the use case of Internet Archive, that shouldn't matter much.

Nextgrid 6y ago
I've seen this argument a lot but I'm not sure how well it holds. The price for performance ratio on cloud providers is so poor that you can overprovision in advance (to mitigate the extra delay involved in adding extra hardware) and still come out ahead. Also, bare-metal doesn't necessarily mean owning the hardware. You can rent it too. There are providers that provide bare-metal in one-click and sometimes available within minutes.
- Sebb767 6y ago
  > The price for performance ratio on cloud providers is so poor that you can overprovision in advance (to mitigate the extra delay involved in adding extra hardware) and still come out ahead. It really depends on what scale you're talking about. When you're a startup and suddenly land on the front page of HN, you might need 100x or 1000x your current capacity - in which case AWS will be useful to no end. If, on the other hand, you're an established name with quite a bit of traffic already and the maximum uptick you will reasonably experience is 2x-3x, the argument holds far less water.
  - ddorian43 6y ago
    Feel free to point to these cases where people scaled 1000x when they hit the HN frontpage. Especially their database.
ddorian43 6y ago
He said his storage pricing is 2-5x cheaper than google archive line. That is $1.2/3x= $0.4/TB/month. Compare that against $20/month S3. He has 50x less cost. He can afford to overprovision.
bnewbold 6y ago
If you are interested in cost modeling for long-term digital preservation, check out this blog series: https://blog.dshr.org/2019/02/economic-models-of-long-term-storage.html https://blog.dshr.org/2019/02/economic-models-of-long-term-s...

by janjim 6y ago

Nextgrid 6y ago

I've seen this argument a lot but I'm not sure how well it holds. The price for performance ratio on cloud providers is so poor that you can overprovision in advance (to mitigate the extra delay involved in adding extra hardware) and still come out ahead. Also, bare-metal doesn't necessarily mean owning the hardware. You can rent it too. There are providers that provide bare-metal in one-click and sometimes available within minutes.

Sebb767 6y ago
> The price for performance ratio on cloud providers is so poor that you can overprovision in advance (to mitigate the extra delay involved in adding extra hardware) and still come out ahead. It really depends on what scale you're talking about. When you're a startup and suddenly land on the front page of HN, you might need 100x or 1000x your current capacity - in which case AWS will be useful to no end. If, on the other hand, you're an established name with quite a bit of traffic already and the maximum uptick you will reasonably experience is 2x-3x, the argument holds far less water.
- ddorian43 6y ago
  Feel free to point to these cases where people scaled 1000x when they hit the HN frontpage. Especially their database.

ddorian43 6y ago

He said his storage pricing is 2-5x cheaper than google archive line. That is $1.2/3x= $0.4/TB/month. Compare that against $20/month S3. He has 50x less cost. He can afford to overprovision.

bnewbold 6y ago

If you are interested in cost modeling for long-term digital preservation, check out this blog series: https://blog.dshr.org/2019/02/economic-models-of-long-term-storage.html https://blog.dshr.org/2019/02/economic-models-of-long-term-s...