3 ms·
I imagine that the response times of S3 vs. this Frankenstore model will be much better, which may be an issue for certain applications. Also you need to host
by lusr 14y ago
I imagine that the response times of S3 vs. this Frankenstore model will be much better, which may be an issue for certain applications.
Also you need to host infrastructure software that knows where your data is sitting, how to deal with provider failures, how to efficiently route requests, etc. which means yet-another-thing-to-configure.
Finally, if the volume of data you're storing is so expensive on S3, I have to wonder why you have all this non-revenue generating data stored in the first place. Processing it also seems more expensive now because the free bandwidth you get from EC2<->S3 won't apply in the Frankenstore model.
- adamsmith 14y agoAll good points! I should have mentioned this more explicitly but you could take the buying-raw-storage model and use it to do anything S3 does, I think. Eg you could have three independent whole copies, or one whole copy and 1.5 copies distributed widely. The only thing I can think of that Amazon could do that you couldn't do, if the raw storage providers are untrusted, is serve the data with no addition hops, since the data would be encrypted.