3 ms·
AWS has repeatedly released new, lower-cost tiers. Indeed, Nix is already using the Infrequent Access tier. That tier already existed when that blog post was ma
by electroly 3y ago
AWS has repeatedly released new, lower-cost tiers. Indeed, Nix is already using the Infrequent Access tier. That tier already existed when that blog post was made, but it hurts the author's point so they didn't mention it. The cheapest tier, Glacier Deep Archive, is $0.00099/GB.
There are still lots of reasons to consider alternative hosting providers (the biggest one: egress) but that blog post--frequently reposted and annoyingly misleading--is not a good summary of the situation here.
- nine_k 3y agoGlacier Deep Archive can take hours to access abucket, likely because the right tape should be shipped from a warehouse.
- electroly 3y agoWe have... a lot of terabytes in GDA. I'm well aware :) I'm trying to show the wide range of tiering options available to fit various needs. OP's article pretends that only Standard exists. You'd be a fool to raw dog 425TB of cold data on the Standard tier, and indeed Nix is not doing that.
- AceJohnny2 3y ago> The cheapest tier, Glacier Deep Archive, is $0.00099/GB. Bad example. "Latency", if it can even be called that, is 12-48 hours. It's not cloud storage, it's archiving.
- anonymousiam 3y agoYeah, $0.00099/GB (roughly $1/TB per month) sounds cheap, but retrieving that data will cost you almost two orders of magnitude more than the storage, so not really such a good deal. Also, obviously the latency of the "glacial" tier is so awful that it is useless for anything other than archival of long-term data without any need for speedy restoration.