3 ms·
> We are running a registry that does store content on R2[1], and today this is implemented as the unholy chimera of Cloudflare Workers, AWS CloudFront, Lambda@
by koolba 2y ago
> We are running a registry that does store content on R2[1], and today this is implemented as the unholy chimera of Cloudflare Workers, AWS CloudFront, Lambda@edge, regular Lambda, S3, and R2.
What’s the advantage over just using ECR? Cost of storage? Cost of bandwidth to read? Hosting provider genetic diversity?
- gyre007 2y agoCost of storage and egress cost are wildly more expensive on ECR compared to CF+R2
- Shakahs 2y agoECR is slow. Despite being a static datastore presumably backed by S3 it will only serve container image layers at around 150mbps, when dealing with large (10GB) container images this is a problem. R2 will happily serve the same data at multi-gigabit speed.
- jacobwg 2y agoData transfer costs. Our registry is for our customers, and they expect to pull their images from environments outside AWS, e.g. GitHub Actions. If that customer has a 2GB image, they want to build the image and then pull it into 10 separate matrix jobs (think like parallel Cypress tests), and they have 1,000 commits in a month, then the AWS data transfer costs are $1,800/mo, just for that one customer to pull their images. With R2, it acts both as a CDN and since Cloudflare does not charge for egress, reduces the cost to only storage + the one-time transfer out of AWS.