Amazon S3 Introduces Reduced Redundancy Storage (2x vs 3x)

http://docs.amazonwebservices.com/AmazonS3/latest/dev/index.html?DataDurability.html#UsingRRS

by justinsb • 16 years ago

34 18 16 years ago

docs.amazonwebservices.com

Update: Werner Vogels weighs in: http://www.allthingsdistributed.com/2010/05/amazon_s3_reduced_redundancy_storage.html

braindead_in• 16 years ago

Is the price less for this? It doesn't say.

amock• 16 years ago

https://aws.amazon.com/s3/#pricing gives the new pricing.

justinsb3• 16 years ago

Pricing starts at 10c/GB rather than 15c/GB; hence I figured it's stored in 2 locations rather than S3's default 3 location redundancy.

tlrobinson2• 16 years ago

Does that match up with the 99.999999999% vs 99.99% durability figures? I don't know what the proper math is here.

edit: they do explicitly say "Designed to sustain the concurrent loss of data in two facilities"

justinsb3• 16 years ago

Werner Vogels' blog posting on this: http://www.allthingsdistributed.com/2010/05/amazon_s3_reduce...

tlrobinson2• 16 years ago

A preemptive strike against Google's rumored S3 competitor?

pytxab• 16 years ago

Doubt it. This isn't a big enough feature to be driven by that situation. It sounds like a routine product improvement to me.

petervandijck2• 16 years ago

I actually think it is. It'll make it harder to say "we're cheaper than aws". Now people will have to qualify that (we're cheaper than some of s3), which makes the statement much weaker.

tybris• 16 years ago

Well, perhaps they have some corporate spies saying that Google will only store things twice to compete with S3 on cost. Probably not though.

pkulak• 16 years ago

If I use this, how do I know when I need to recreate an object?

bbgm• 16 years ago

From Jeff Barr's blog post: http://aws.typepad.com/aws/2010/05/new-amazon-s3-reduced-red...

"If Amazon S3 detects that an object has been lost any subsequent requests for that object will return the HTTP 405 ("Method Not Allowed") status code. Your application can then handle this error in an appropriate fashion. If the object lives elsewhere you would fetch it, put it back into S3 (using the same key), and then retry the retrieval operation. If the object was designed to be derived from other information, you would do the processing (perhaps it is an image scaling or transcoding task), put the new image back into S3 (again, using the same key), and retry the retrieval operation."

stcredzero• 16 years ago

S4 should respond with a "No Redundancy" feature.

http://www.supersimplestorageservice.com/

petervandijck2• 16 years ago

I'm probably an aws fanboi by now but I think this is great. Store your not-so-important stuff 30% cheaper. I can see how I'd use this immediately.

mark_l_watson• 16 years ago

Amazon sells technology that they developed for their own use. I wonder what data they store in RRS? Tracking information? User calculated preferences on products?

DenisM• 16 years ago

map-reduce jobs intermediate results?

Amazon S3 Introduces Reduced Redundancy Storage (2x vs 3x)

Related Stories