3 ms·

Thanks for the detailed breakdown, that's really interesting! Sounds like you were bitten by this? :)

• Siliticxx 12y ago
  Ok. I have to this to this. i'm sorry. I guess he would say he was... sunglasses FROSTBITTEN YEAH!
  • AceJohnny2 12y ago
    I understand, but please go stand in the corner there and think about what you've done.
• ak217 12y ago
  Don't know about the OP, but we were bitten by this - badly - after our logic to throttle Glacier retrieval failed. AWS has now added the ability to set a spending limit to avoid runaway retrievals. Nonetheless, from my point of view the ultra-complicated pricing scheme is nothing short of a disaster for Glacier as a product. I think it will continue to seriously impact its uptake, and Google is smart to exploit the opportunity to offer a simple, straightforward pricing scheme.
  • NeutronBoy 12y ago
    The use case is people who have a requirement to store data and probably never need to access it, either for reg requirements, or legal requirements, etc. In which case paying a couple of hundred bucks for retrieval is fine, especially if they can access at a high level of granularity edit: Also as others have pointed out, Nearline is limited in retrieval time as well, so the cost difference isn't nearly as large.