New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
I tried both storj & backblaze in the same region (EU). Price, compared with backblaze, its cheaper for $ per GB, but for egress cost backblaze is cheaper. also, transfer speed is slower then backblaze.
I've used it as both backup storage and "CDN" aka just a fediverse file storage. It works pretty well, but, at least for me, the encryption stuff (on the web ui, that is) are really wierd. I use the correct stuff copied from my password manager but it just shows some or none data.
S3 expensive, take server or Hetzner storage box
Hetzner storage box is expensive, use Romanian basement storage VPS
If your host doesn't go deadpool, you never know in Romania,
You diversify your risk by using multiple Romanian basement providers obviously
Then it's not cheap anymore
Still cheaper than Hetzner storage box
Depends if you want to use your files and not wait 1month to transfer.
What I do is load balance on 2 Romanian basement providers for storage.
One provider with DDoS/network problems and the second with catastrophic data loss problems.
When I load balance them, they cancel out each others problems.
Files are encrypted by passphrase. If you upload files under a passphrase, the files will only show up when you use the same passphrase. The problem is when we forgot the passphrase, then we cant access our files anymore and they dont have “reset passphrase” feature like reset password.
S3 frozen storage is cheap. Its about 1$ for a TB.
S3 frozen storage
how much does it cost to retrieve?
It cost 12 hours waiting time.
12 hours waiting for download or speed of downloading 1TB can be 12 hours or more?
i am using Sia, cheap and very fast
Oke so not save for important data
but good for Linux isos
Backblaze B2 with SeaweedFS in front. You get the benefit of all of your data syncing to B2 but gain a cache in front to cut down on transaction and bandwidth costs
You can buy a 40tb server at Hetzner for 55 bucks
You can buy a 40tb server at Hetzner for 55 bucks 1gbit up/down why using S3 ? I see no point.
But then you have to setup raid, so you lose some space there, have the hassle of losing disks and the hassle of scaling once you've used all the space. Although yeah, this likely makes sense if you're storing 100s of TBs of data.
I I really don't trust alot of those S3 company's I think if something breaks down your data is gone, see it Manny times on forums.
Curious to know which companies. I'd avoid Wasabi, Storj, DO Spaces and the other random ones, especially contabo. S3, B2 and R2 are likely okay.
Yeah I think you know what I mean also the performance is not that great I have used E2 from a known company I forget the name
Ah yeah, I wouldn't use iDrive E2 either lol
Yes that was it, and wasabi is more expense then buying a server yourself. Because of the egress
Wasabi has no fees for egress.
Don't they have a weird system where you can egress up to the amount you have stored?
Yeah this exactly what I mean they have Al this kind of special things were you have to pay, if you need storage just buy a dedicated server if you need save storage buy 2
At a certain point I agree with this, likely at least 100TB of data (on B2 this would cost $500/mo with 300TB egress + transactions). Beyond that, the cost of buying dedis and maintaining your own storage probably becomes worth it, but potentially not depending on your business.
But for me, yeah, 100TB+, I'd be setting up a SeaweedFS cluster (maybe with super important stuff on tiered storage backed by a S3 provider). At that point you can scale by just adding storage nodes.
My current use case doesn't use lots of storage but does use lots of transactions, hence caching with the data actually being stored in B2.