S3 isn’t always cheaper though… It’s highly redundant storage (multiple copies in multiple data centers) so it’s often going to cost more than a single copy on a single VPS or dedicated server or whatever. I guess in some cases it might end up cheaper compared to upgrading your storage to something larger though.
If you do want to migrate your images “to the cloud”, Backblaze B2 should end up cheaper than S3.
You don’t pay for storing on multiple servers. I never saw something like this on any provider I know.
Upgrading storage is not cheaper. Instance media storage reaches 500GB in a month and S3 is always cheaper than data volumes with given options for pictrs.
Backblaze is not cheapest. It has egress fees so it will cost much more than others. Although its cheaper than AWS.
Instance media storage reaches 500GB in a month and S3 is always cheaper than data volumes
Not sure where you got the idea that S3 would always be cheaper. $5/TB/month is a standard benchmark price for storage “in the cloud”, and S3 is way more than that.
As an example, a Hetzner storage box is around $3.50/month (+ VAT if you’re in Europe) for 1TB of space with unlimited traffic. The same amount of space with S3 is $23/month, plus the traffic.
For caches of media files, you don’t need redundant storage like what S3 provides. You can save money by using a cheaper option.
Backblaze is not cheapest.
I didn’t say it was the cheapest, just that it’s cheaper than S3. Cheapest would probably be a Kimsufi server or something similar.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !selfhosted@lemmy.world
A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don’t control.
Rules:
Be civil: we’re here to support and learn from one another. Insults won’t be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.
No spam posting.
Posts have to be centered around self-hosting. There are other communities for discussing hardware or home computing. If it’s not obvious why your post topic revolves around selfhosting, please include details to make it clear.
Don’t duplicate the full text of your blog or github here. Just post the link for folks to click.
Submission headline should match the article title (don’t cherry-pick information from the title to fit your agenda).
No trolling.
Resources:
selfh.st Newsletter and index of selfhosted software and apps
S3 isn’t always cheaper though… It’s highly redundant storage (multiple copies in multiple data centers) so it’s often going to cost more than a single copy on a single VPS or dedicated server or whatever. I guess in some cases it might end up cheaper compared to upgrading your storage to something larger though.
If you do want to migrate your images “to the cloud”, Backblaze B2 should end up cheaper than S3.
For services like S3, it’s included in the price.
Not sure where you got the idea that S3 would always be cheaper. $5/TB/month is a standard benchmark price for storage “in the cloud”, and S3 is way more than that.
As an example, a Hetzner storage box is around $3.50/month (+ VAT if you’re in Europe) for 1TB of space with unlimited traffic. The same amount of space with S3 is $23/month, plus the traffic.
For caches of media files, you don’t need redundant storage like what S3 provides. You can save money by using a cheaper option.
I didn’t say it was the cheapest, just that it’s cheaper than S3. Cheapest would probably be a Kimsufi server or something similar.
This is for an SSD-based volume, which you really don’t need for media storage. If you’re using Hetzner, just get a storage box.