... this is on you to prove it is their secret sauce. Throwing out some random feature and saying it is their secret sauce and putting the burden of proof on somebody else makes no sense.

But it would be because 1) they probably don't have many duped objects to begin with 2) the system to de-dupe items would be complex, error prone, increase latency, and just not worth it

> 1) they probably don't have many duped objects to begin with

That's crap reasoning. You have no way of knowing that.

> 2) the system to de-dupe items would be complex, error prone, increase latency, and just not worth

Would it really be that complex? I kinda doubt that.

Read latencies wouldn't be affected - except being improved.

Write latencies - the deduplication can happen after the write has been confirmed, so no extra latency added.

Whether or not it's worth it - I think it's very hard to to estimate the deduplication factor. My guess is 1.5x. At that point it would save 33% storage. That would instanly make a whole lot of extra complexity worth it.

It's like you are living in an alternate reality

...because?

I dunno, I kinda think you might be out of your depth on this one, based on that response.

Also: none of your few previous posts are tech-related. They're all about personal finance.

So just to sum up your argument: You think 33% of objects in S3 are dupes and that removing those dupes would be S3's secret sauce?

You're incredibly condescending and just full of incorrect assumptions. Done with this conversation

...