Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by boramalper 1304 days ago
IPFS isn't my favourite tool either but you are wrong.

> So to do this from scratch (not mirroring somebody else's content) needs a minimum of >62TB -- 31TB of content, which ipfsd will then package into 31TB more + overhead in its storage area.

IPFS has `nocopy` option for quite some time now, which avoids copying.

> And of course if you're doing this, you're expecting other people to mirror this stuff, so count on hundreds of terabytes of traffic.

Of course you are expecting other people to mirror this stuff, and naturally that will generate some traffic. How is this not a problem with web mirrors or torrents?

1 comments

> IPFS has `nocopy` option for quite some time now, which avoids copying.

Oh, didn't find about that one. Thanks!

> Of course you are expecting other people to mirror this stuff, and naturally that will generate some traffic. How is this not a problem with web mirrors or torrents?

I mean, if I put a book archive on the web, I'd expect the vast majority of people to just grab whichever book they were interested in. Mirroring is a possibility, but a non-trivial thing to accomplish, and can be discouraged.

Meanwhile, on IPFS I'd expect a much higher likelihood of somebody trying to replicate the whole archive, so one would do well to keep that in mind and to be prepared for it.

You're welcome!

Re #2: Perhaps that's true, but on the other hand, the load will be distributed across all seeders with IPFS whereas your web server will be the only one shouldering it.