4 ms·
YouTube stores at least 7ish copies of every video (different resolutions) and people record higher quality footage than they used and people have moved more aw
by worldofmatthew 4y ago
YouTube stores at least 7ish copies of every video (different resolutions) and people record higher quality footage than they used and people have moved more away from bitrate-light vlogs to bitrate-heavy gaming videos.
And when you consider that hard drives have stagnated in price over the past few years, YouTube is doomed if it does not delete unprofitable videos. Unless prices to host content goes down, the whole thing becomes a sort of ponzi.
- jefftk 4y agoFor a video that is viewed rarely enough they could store one (replicated) copy instead of seven (replicated) copies. Or turn off replication for six of those seven resolutions.
- zrail 4y agoThey're not replicas, they're different resolutions.
- jffry 4y agoYes but presumably there are storage replicas for each version of the video. The suggested idea, which Google might already do, is to keep the low quality videos in less redundant storage on the theory that they can be re-encoded from the more durably stored original video if the underlying storage fails.
- philippejara 4y ago>And when you consider that hard drives have stagnated in price over the past few years, YouTube is doomed if it does not delete unprofitable videos Not necessarily, is storage(and not retrieval) that much of a cost? and if so is youtube's revenue/storage cost actually decreasing? and if it is would the backlash for deleting people's videos worth the reputational cost? especially when you have an entire industry around small people trying to get big, the majority of which will never get there. Youtube even tried putting a limitation on non-premium users watching 4k video and pulled back on it, can't imagine something as drastic as deleting videos would be worth it.