← Back to context

Comment by advisedwang

13 hours ago

That depends on the data. If this is EBS or single-AZ S3, then from Amazon's perspective this was correct. Backup responsibly (for any data that does need to be backed up) lives with the customer, and Amazon has no way of knowing about that. EBS data data is unrecoverable, and that's what's reported.

Now if this was multi-AZ S3 or whatever then this would be significant.

The article does not tell us what products were impacted.

I was unaware that Amazon even sold single AZ S3. 20% discount. Doesn't seem worth it. By the time I commit to purchasing S3 space, it has to be important data.

I get that S3 is convenient and reasonably performant, but it is not cheap at all.

  • That’s simply not true. I use S3 (well GCS mostly) for data that I wouldn’t be upset if it’s lost. And I pay the zonal discount for it.

    • Google internally has lots of possible redundancy levels for data.

      They don't sell any of the lower and less reliable levels to the public, I suspect simply because the reputational damage from losing user data is so bad, and the news will take no notice of the fact the user got a discount for less reliable storage.

      1 reply →

    • You call it "discount" but it's a 20% discount on a 10x inflated price, so it's an 8x inflated price

  • Yeah agreed - any ephemeral stuff I need is generally in DynamoDB - S3 (and database) are for permanent storage.

  • Single AZ S3 has other benefits. The point isn't the price, it's that it's _highly performant_ since you can keep all of your reads in the same AZ

  • It's a great service for large caches. For example, we process a lot of imagery that we download from third-party providers. We save a lot of latency by storing the data in a single-AZ S3.

    If it dies, we will just have to re-download the data.

> EBS data data (sic) is unrecoverable, and that's what's reported.

I don't see where this is reported? TFA does not mention EBS. In fact, TFA seems to be nigh content-free, beyond "AWS (allegedly, and is uncited) says they cannot restore some data."

> The article does not tell us what products were impacted.

… right … which conflicts with EBS being what's reported …

(I would agree with your point that if EBS, or some AZ-level data was lost, then, yeah, that's the contract.)