Concerns have been raised about how expensive Glacier gets if you need
to recover a lot of files in a short time period.

http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/08/glacier/

On 1/10/13 5:56 PM, Roy Tennant wrote:
> I'd also take a look at Amazon Glacier. Recently I parked about 50GB
> of data files in logical tar'd and gzip'd chunks and it's costing my
> employer less than 50 cents/month. Glacier, however, is best for "park
> it and forget" kinds of needs, as the real cost is in data flow.
> Storage is cheap, but must be considered "offline" or "near line" as
> you must first request to retrieve a file, wait for about a day, and
> then retrieve the file. And you're charged more for the download
> throughput than just about anything.
> 
> I'm using a Unix client to handle all of the heavy lifting of
> uploading and downloading, as Glacier is meant to be used via an API
> rather than a web client.[1] If anyone is interested, I have local
> documentation on usage that I could probably genericize. And yes, I
> did round-trip a file to make sure it functioned as advertised.
> Roy
> 
> [1] https://github.com/vsespb/mt-aws-glacier
> 
> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 2:29 PM,  <[email protected]> wrote:
>> We built our own solution for this by creating a plugin that works with our 
>> digital asset management system (ResourceSpace) to invidually back up files 
>> to Amazon S3. Because S3 is replicated to multiple data centers, this 
>> provides a fairly high level of redundancy. And because it's an object-based 
>> web service, we can access any given object individually by using a URL 
>> related to the original storage URL within our system.
>>
>> This also allows us to take advantage of S3 for images on our website. All 
>> of the images from in our online collections database are being served 
>> straight from S3, which diverts the load from our public web server. When we 
>> launch zoomable images later this year, all of the tiles will also be 
>> generated locally in the DAM and then served to the public via the mirrored 
>> copy in S3.
>>
>> The current pricing is around $0.08/GB/month for 1-50 TB, which I think is 
>> fairly reasonable for what we're getting. They just dropped the price 
>> substantially a few months ago.
>>
>> DuraCloud http://www.duracloud.org/ supposedly offers a way to add another 
>> abstraction layer so you can build something like this that is portable 
>> between different cloud storage providers. But I haven't really looked into 
>> this as of yet.


-- 
Gary McGath, Professional Software Developer
http://www.garymcgath.com

Reply via email to