3 ms·
I used Backblaze B2 for a project as the store of the files. I had to switch to elsewhere once hitting production, when doing thousands of async upload request
by agustif 5y ago
I used Backblaze B2 for a project as the store of the files.
I had to switch to elsewhere once hitting production, when doing thousands of async upload requests, some would randomly 403 on me. Their customers rep solution was to handle it on my side (yeah, I know) but it was easier for me to just switch providers.
I guess for other products Backblaze is good, but I wouldn't recommend their Backblaze B2 to other fellow devs, those nines of availability in difference are noticeable on the long run
- cdumler 5y agoB2 was designed for backup storage, not being a fake hard drive. Even if it was, you would have a far better solution for dealing with latency and your data being in the clear if you would use `rclone`. Add the B2 storage backend, then a local cache to B2, then encryption to cache. You then get local performance from the cache, unlimited space from B2, and it becomes eventually consistent in the background.
- motoboi 5y agoB2 advertises itself as an object storage suitable to applications. This can be thousands of mobile devices using an app to save photos. His use case is, IMHO, right inside what they advertise. The cloud backup is another product.
- msbarnett 5y ago> B2 was designed for backup storage… unlimited space from B2… You seem confused – B2 is Backblaze’s pay-per-GB-stored-or-downloaded AWS S3 competitor, not their consumer unlimited backup product. It even clones the S3 API for maximum ease of switching. It’s not unreasonable of anyone to expect B2 to work in the same usecases one would have for S3.
- tux3 5y agoTheir API used to frequently have a _high_ error rate, to the point my exponential backoff retry loops were giving up occasionally. Seems to have improved a lot in the last few years though.