Data stored in Glacier takes three to five hours to access.
Files stored via Glacier have an annual durability of 99.999999999 percent, according to Amazon; this means that if a company uses it to hold 100 billion objects, it can expect to lose one each year
The numbers stack up that if you start with 100GB then add 10GB/month, it would cost $102.60 after 3 years on AWS Glacier vs $1,282.50 on AWS S3.
So the question has to be asked to replace your tap backup for $100 over 3 years…..do you trust Amazon with your data now? Is it worth the risk to store it offsite where you don’t control access with a 1 in 10billon chance you could lose data over 10 years.
What do people think?
Post a Comment