Comment

Comment by IMSAI8080

I don't think it's so clear cut. They have to pay to compress it. If the data the customer stores is short lived it may not be worth it to them. They don't know if the customer already compressed it so they might be wasting their CPU. They also have to pay to decompress it on every access. They allow you to slice an arbitrary byte range out of an object which is technically harder to implement on a compressed file. They charge by the GB and are not exactly super cheap so if the customer wants to store a big fat file of easily compressible zeros then whatever, they got their money.

It might make more sense on their "deep archive" product maybe where the customer has to commit to a minimum storage retention and also pay a retrieval charge which scales with the amount of data recovered (hence paying for the CPU to decompress).

parent IMSAI8080 4 years ago

Discussion

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton