I'd be fascinated if you could share your insights from using this. Where does the pricing fall down? And is the latency/throughput a big improvement for this use case? (ie. externalizing a search index).
I ran the benchmark at Quickwit. I confirm it works as intended.
I was extremely excited about this feature, primarily interested in the decreased GET request cost, and secondly the lower latency.
Unfortunately the price model puts it in a place where it is the right technology only for some very rare places.
In a nutshell the key thing you need to know is:
- The storage is 6.4x expensive than classic S3.
- The GET requests are 2x cheaper (with additional cost for large requests).
- Your data is replicated within a single region.
- latency is single digit ms.
From a pure cost wise point of view, the realm where it makes sense to use it is there, but small,
and often competes more with EBS than it competes with S3.
Unfortunately the price model puts it in a place where it is the right technology only for some very rare places.
In a nutshell the key thing you need to know is: - The storage is 6.4x expensive than classic S3. - The GET requests are 2x cheaper (with additional cost for large requests). - Your data is replicated within a single region. - latency is single digit ms.
From a pure cost wise point of view, the realm where it makes sense to use it is there, but small, and often competes more with EBS than it competes with S3.