AWS switch from gzip to zstd – about 30% reduction in compressed S3 storage

Re:AWS switch from gzip to zstd – about 30% reduction in com... by jankeymeulen on Saturday August 20, 2022 @05:48AM (#32530754)

Amazon will pay perhaps $50 for a 10TB disk, 10x it to cover for redundancy and the servers and datacenters to put the disks in, and you're looking at "only" 16 mil savings for an exabyte.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AWS switch from gzip to zstd – about 30% reduction in com... by social_quotient on Saturday August 20, 2022 @12:53PM (#32533439)

Anyone by chance know how many exabytes s3 is?

Did some searches but came up with some guesses like https://maisonbisson.com/post/how-big-is-s3/ but they are dated and still just guesses.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AWS switch from gzip to zstd – about 30% reduction in com... by ksec on Sunday August 21, 2022 @05:50AM (#32538695)

Let's say a 100 exabyte, which is only 100 times larger than Backblaze. And Amazon pay $100 per 10TB, it is unrealistically low, but just to round down the number nicely . ( It is not $50 for 10TB, part of the reason why HN dont understand Supply Chains and BOM cost. )

On pure storage that is 100,000,000TB. That is 1 billion dollar already excluding any redundancy required by S3.

[ Parent | on HN ]