The total dataset was just about 3TB, so storing it was not an issue.
It does make sense. Thanks for satisfying my curiosity :)
Is that a fixed-cost sustained pipe though? I was under the impression that (at least at the backbone level) those contracts got more costly the closer to full that your pipe was.
It's obvious that I had no idea about costs. I honestly thought it would be much more expensive.
I just thought that moving that much data would cost some serious money. Apparently that's not really moving "that much data".
Wrong assumptions on my part :/
I still didn't make my own "clone", because I can't afford machines to start selling it.
AWS has a lot of 'free' services, which still have to be paid for. Some of those free services are things that benefit both the client and AWS, but would be avoided by many if folks had to pay for them (like IAM credentialling)
What kind of site would serve that volume of traffic and not have 56k for operating expenses? I mean, I can think of a few examples like Wikipedia maybe, since they are non-commercial and such, but for a commercial business? Maybe 4chan moves that much without a lot of revenue I would think, or maybe... imgur? but not really sure, I mean, it would seem like they could get that amount easily via ads alone.
What was the use case here?
Also, I think that 56k for traffic alone kind of depends on context. I mean, how much does Netflix pay for serving their volume of traffic?
What I'm saying is, isn't 700 TB a month something that would probably be very expensive no matter the context? Just storing 700TB would cost a lot, no?
I'm really curious about your use case here.