|
|
|
|
|
by fulmicoton
937 days ago
|
|
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. |
|