News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on AWS faulty UX cost our business $7k and they refused to do anything about it. Parent comment

Re:AWS faulty UX cost our business $7k and they refused to d... by e_proxus on Thursday March 04, 2021 @02:03AM (#26339499)
Not dismissing your other concerns, but

> create a copy of objects with a different storage class and delete the old objects. It doesn't make sense that it would just duplicate my objects

Isn’t that exactly what 'copy' means in pretty much all IT contexts?

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AWS faulty UX cost our business $7k and they refused to d... by mikeyla85 on Thursday March 04, 2021 @02:15AM (#26339593)
Not really in S3...

It seems that some "move" operations are "copy" operations, which is the context in which I understood this warning:

https://forums.aws.amazon.com/thread.jspa?messageID=455101#j...

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AWS faulty UX cost our business $7k and they refused to d... by e_proxus on Thursday March 04, 2021 @06:15AM (#26341040)
Seems to me that there are no “move” operations in S3, only copy and delete (which mean exactly what they say). So copy still means copy, and if you implement your own “move” you have to make sure it does what you want.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AWS faulty UX cost our business $7k and they refused to d... by mikeyla85 on Thursday March 04, 2021 @08:51AM (#26342367)
Yep, which is what makes "creates a copy" in this warning seem like "copy and delete". Because just creating a copy and not deleting the original is nothing at all like editing storage class.
[ Parent | on HN ]