←back to thread

From S3 to R2: An economic opportunity

(dansdatathoughts.substack.com)
274 points dangoldin | 1 comments | 02 Nov 23 19:15 UTC | HN request time: 0.206s | source
Show context
jokethrowaway ◴[02 Nov 23 20:52 UTC] No.38119975[source]▶
It blows my mind that anyone would consider S3 cheap.

You always had available plenty of space on dedicated servers for way cheaper before the cloud.

You could make an argument about the API being nicer than dealing with a linux server - but is AWS nice? I think it's pretty awful and requires tons of (different, specific, non transferable) knowledge.

Hype, scalability buzzwords thrown around by startups with 1000 users and 1M contract with AWS.

Sure R2 is cheaper but it's still not a low cost option. You are paying for a nice shiny service.

replies(1): >>38121485 #
1. gen220 ◴[02 Nov 23 22:49 UTC] No.38121485[source]▶
I think it all depends on the volume of data you're storing, access requirements, and how much value you plan to generate per GB.

It's certainly quite cheap for a set of typical "requirements" for media hosting companies.

But yeah, if you're storing data for mainly archival purposes, you shouldn't be paying for R2 or S3.