Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I particularly love Cloud Platform's Nearline storage for personal media archival. Previously I was using Amazon's Glacier, but the interface was clunky and the load times were too slow. Cloud Platform's web UI, comparatively, has been an absolute joy to use at a roughly similar price point.

Note that while Nearline's pricing is identical to glacier, it's response time is almost immediate, compared to ~4 hours for glacier.

The pricing is actually no longer identical. Amazon's latest price refreshes dropped Glacier to below Nearline and introduced a new S3 object type (e.g. Reduced Redundancy Storage) called Infrequent Access that's a lot more like Nearline.

I like the new Infrequent Access, but I'd like to understand the tradeoffs better. What's the downside compared to regular S3?

It mentions 99.9% availability instead of 99.99%, but it would be useful to understand how that is manifested in reality, and what the underlying architectural difference is.

I tried to ask jeffbarr here[1], but got no answer.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10230937

Sorry I missed that, I have been working 16+ hours per day to get ready for re:Invent.

Please take a break when you can!

disclaimer: I am OP and work at GCP.

Watch out for minimum file size on Standard-IA: it's 128kb, and if you write a file smaller than that they round up. It's little gotchas like this that can really burn you...

I really don't know how they do this, but hubiC from OVH is order of magnitude cheaper. Works well for me with git-annex, fsck reports no data loss.

(Not affiliated except for being a customer for 1.5 years.)

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact