4 ms·
You are correct, But as I understand, They get "RAW" file access to the S3 hard disk (or the equivalent) in their solution. So no matter what solution I might s
by yonixw 5y ago
You are correct, But as I understand, They get "RAW" file access to the S3 hard disk (or the equivalent) in their solution. So no matter what solution I might spawn, it will always be slower and more expensive.
Maybe I should have said "closed internal access features"
- bushbaba 5y agoDoubtful. I've personally had projects pull many hundreds of gigabits per second of s3 throughput. How you architect and design has a large influence to your analytics performance.
- dijit 5y ago“Many hundreds” Last time I talked to a technical person at AWS the limit was 5GBits. Wonder what you’re doing differently. Perhaps that changed.
- dastbe 5y agoyou were quoted a per-object rate.
- nijave 5y agoThere's another benchmark somewhere showing S3 can max out a 100Gbps instance. https://github.com/dvassallo/s3-benchmark https://github.com/dvassallo/s3-benchmark Another potential issue is ListBucket rate limiting. If you have lots of small objects, you'll spend most of the time waiting to discover the names than transferring data