Re:Sony and Panasonic announce the Archival Disc format
by acdha on Monday March 10, 2014 @02:26PM
(#7374738)
Your Glacier comparisons should include the fact that Glacier is an actively managed service with very high durability[1] – if you're buying external USB drives, you need at least two drives simply to avoid single-device failures and that's before you get to geographic separation and the software + staffing to provide regular active testing for bit-rot, not to mention some sort of software scheme to prevent data from being altered after it's been written (malware, human error, etc.)
You can definitely beat AWS on price but there's a non-trivial up front investment required unless you're comfortable skimping on the operational benefits.
1. http://aws.amazon.com/glacier/ promises 99.999999999%
Re:Sony and Panasonic announce the Archival Disc format
by e12e on Tuesday March 11, 2014 @01:51AM
(#7377674)
Of course. But you get three TB for the price of one on glacier (not surprising, considering they guarantee redundancy) with money to spare - per year of storage. So if you can archive to disk(s) and assume the disks hold for five years there's a pretty big difference in price (obviously, glacier probably will become cheaper in the years to come, but that's still a pretty big difference in the consumer spectrum -- for a business -- probably not so much).
Depends on the from and to. 1TB at a sustained 100mbs is roughly 24 hours. Or 10 days at 10mbs sustained. If your data is actually written to disk somewhere, I doubt you can sustain more than 200mbps for most services?
So, if you record home video in 4k -- you're going to reach a practical bw ceiling pretty soon. In general disk usage is going up faster than bandwidth -- so archive media isn't likely to go anywhere.
As for Amazon Glacier, cost will come to 120-133 USD per Terabyte/year -- with an additional cost of ~300 to retrieve a Terabyte in 24 hours. For comparison, a 4TB usb3 external drive costs about 150 USD now -- and you'd break even buying 3 each year -- in terms of cost/TB (assuming you could store them for free, and spent the 300 on retrieval as needed).