3 ms·
> No mention on reliability, a lot of S3 alternatives have spawned up over the years, and they’ve all faced data corruption issues to some extent, that can be h
by koolba 3y ago
> No mention on reliability, a lot of S3 alternatives have spawned up over the years, and they’ve all faced data corruption issues to some extent, that can be horrendous for a lot of object storage usecases.
Data corruption is horrendous for all use cases. But if the use case is backups, it’s particularly horrendous.
When you say “all”, do you mean the other big two players too? Or just the new crop of smaller ones?
- teitoklien 3y agoI haven’t personally heard dataloss issues with big 3, but have previous read and heard about dataloss (very rare) in other smaller startups. I remember wasabi one time losing the data of a customer (no comments tho, its very rare and they are significantly cheaper than big 3, so you get what you pay for) But personally, I’d never touch azure, they get hacked every 3 months or so, get some sort of a fatal bug on their critical products, google and aws much better in that regard. Personally I do not trust object storage much at all, and like keeping an offline backup of aws s3 objects (its not a snapshot, but rather and continuously updating locally stored disk backup, that tracks all S3 changes with s3’s etag parameter and a postgres table, ofcourse might be hard to continue at larger scales. An alternative to AWS S3 only makes sense from a pricing standpoint, otherwise they are the king, my favourite feature is their AWS S3 Upload Accelerator, which speeds up user uploading of assets to your object storage, very handy for my current startup. But yea, overall I’d be very wary of using AWS S3 alternative except for the most simplest of usecases. It’s a very polished, well integrated product from amazon at this point. Most startups in the S3 space, do. not. compare.