What Is Cloud Data Egress - And Why it SUCKS!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 28 лип 2024
- What Is Cloud Egress? And Why It SUCKS! nascompares.com/2024/07/22/wh...
Which Backup Method is Best? NAS vs Cloud vs Tape vs USB nascompares.com/guide/which-i...
Reasons to Switch from Cloud to NAS Drives nascompares.com/2021/04/08/re...
NAS is Better than Cloud - Ditch Your Google Drive, iCloud, DropBox, • NAS is Better than Clo...
MINISFORUM MS-01 Workstation on Amazon - amzn.to/4bwwACk
Minisforum MS-01 VirtualizationHowTo Video - • Minisforum MS-01 Revie...
What Is The Most User-Friendly DiY / BYO NAS Software? (2024) nascompares.com/guide/what-is...
Guido's How-Tos / @guidoshowtos
CWWK Q670 Gen 5 NAS 8-Bay Board Review nascompares.com/review/cwwk-q...
CWWK Q670 8-Bay Gen5 NAS MoBo ($203 AliExpress) s.click.aliexpress.com/e/_DCf...
CWWK X86 P5 NVMe NAS Review nascompares.com/review/cwwk-x...
CWWK x86 P5 NVMe NAS Board ($155 AliExpress) - s.click.aliexpress.com/e/_Dkx...
CWWK x86 P5 Barebones + Case ($239 Amazon) - amzn.to/44MatoA
Which Backup Method is Best? NAS vs Cloud vs Tape vs USB nascompares.com/guide/which-i...
Video Chapters
00:00 - The Start
01:13 - DISCLAIMER! I Use Cloud...Kind of
01:47 - What is DATA Egress?
06:11 - Cloud Benefit of the Doubt
08:12 - Use Case Scenarios of Egress Price Hits
12:37 - Conclusion
Recommended Jonsbo N3 NAS Builds For $300 - $500 - $1000+ nascompares.com/guide/recomme...
The Jonsbo N3 NAS Case Review - nascompares.com/review/the-jo...
Jonsbo N2 vs N3 NAS Case - Get It Right First Time! nascompares.com/guide/jonsbo-...
Synology/QNAP versus Build Your Own NAS - nascompares.com/guide/build-y...
nascompares.com/2023/09/08/to...
I Built the Jonsbo N2 NAS - • I Built the Jonsbo N2 ...
Jonsbo N2 NAS Build Complete Guide UnRAID/TrueNAS - nascompares.com/2023/09/01/jo...
Best 2-Bay NAS of 2022/2023 - • Best 2-Bay NAS of 2022...
Best 4-Bay NAS of 2022/2023 - • Best 4-Bay NAS of 2022...
Best 6-Bay NAS of 2022/2023 - • Best 6-Bay NAS of 2022...
Best 8 Bay NAS of 2022/2023 - • Best 8 Bay NAS of 2022...
Best Photography NAS of 2022/2023 - • Best Photography NAS o...
Find Your ideal NAS here on Amazon - amzn.to/3BpPQRk
Best Buy also provide NAS solutions, visit them here - bestbuy.7tiv.net/DVNO4j
Looking for deals and offers on all things NAS? Take a look at what devices are on special offer right now, worldwide, by visiting here - nascompares.com/daily-deals/
The NAScompares Podcast - Let's Talk Data
Amazon Podcasts - music.amazon.co.uk/podcasts/5...
Spotify Podcasts - spotifyanchor-web.app.link/e/...
Castbox Podcasts - castbox.fm/channel/id5420217?...
Hire Robbie or Eddie as a consultant or to do some analysis of your security here - ko-fi.com/nascompares/commiss...
Buyers Guide to NAS (Synology, QNAP, Terramaster, Asustor, WD And More) - nascompares.com/2023/05/10/bu...
buy
Thinking of buying a product mentioned in today's video from Amazon? If this video has helped you make that decision, you can head to Amazon using this link and we will get a small % profit of whatever you buy, which goes directly back to NASCompares and allows me and Eddie to keep doing what we do here on UA-cam and the Blog - amzn.to/3TjM0kj
Visit the Community Support forum 'ASK NASCompares' here if you need more help - ask.nascompares.com/
Finally, if you need data storage/networking help NOW and the free advice/forum on NASCompares is not going to be quick enough for you, you can use the Ko-fi commissions page here - ko-fi.com/nascompares/commissions
NASCompares Free Advice Area - nascompares.com/contact-us/
Synology NAS DSM 7.1 NAS Software Review - • Synology DSM 7.1 Softw...
Synology DSM 7.2 - • Synology DSM 7.2 RC Re...
QTS 5.1 QNAP NAS Software - • QNAP QTS 5.1 Beta - Bi...
QNAP QuTS 5.1 ZFS NAS Software Review - Best of Both Worlds - • QNAP QuTS 5.0.1 ZFS NA...
This video was sobering. I've calculated these costs, but it's not really transparent even for those who understand IT and know what they're looking for. The average user is unaware of these problems. Very useful and good that you explained it in a short and clear way.
The backup cloud provider I use has an option where they will mail you a storage device once per year (personal account) or three times per year (business account). You can use the service to send or retrieve bulk data using express delivery. I used the service once to send them data when I first started with them.
This is why I don’t use cloud. In the long run having another Synology that is remote is the more cost effective solution. Up front cost can sting but no surprises down the road.
Couldn't agree more!
"but no surprises down the road." Really? Both NAS's fail or malware hits one and the other fails, theft of them both, a partner takes them, no actual backup strategy just file sync instead.
@@cam_934 Well I can come up edge cases as a con for any strategy. If you can afford the cloud, go for it.
@@cam_934all od what you wrote Are due to poor decisions by thé user. With NASes IT can be Done right; you not knowing how Is your problem.
@@cam_934 The cloud doesn't take ownership of your data either. If they sync up or remove data because of ransomeware, etc and you do not catch it in time it's in your backup too. Read the TOS of your cloud provider. The goal should be to harden your security and properly airgap. How would both NAS fail at the same time? You could get 10 of them for the price of downloading your data one time in the cloud.
Good that someone finally publicized this. The IT folks at my organization has joked for years that it is cheap to get data into 3rd party cloud, but getting back out will cost more than a bit. The other cost to consider is the same thing that killed the data center management concept, and that is that you don't control the ongoing costs. It may be cheap to store your data in cloud today, but the cost increases over time are not in your control. At what point does that cost exceed what it would cost to host your data on your own hardware. Of course, then you have the egress costs at that point as well.
And none of this discusses the complexity of using cloud servers (IaaS, PaaS) and the challenges increased communication path complexity bring.
Egress is also a massive pain in the arse when a company migrates to another PaaS/SaaS with cloud...as he egress charges are the same (occasionally worse) than cloud migration. The cloud companies are massively aware of this too
a real eye opener, been shopping for personal cloud storage and this was completely out of my radar...
Another excellent video.
If you have a family member or friend, you could set up mutual cloud storage and backups.
Buddy backs rock!
Very good video. It's true that all you hear about the cloud is either from those who love it or those that hate it.
All the companies I've worked for always want to move to cloud but they never ever consider coming up with a back out plan in case things turn sour.
Cloud services are designed to lock you in and make switching to a competitor (or to a self hosted solution) as difficult as possible.
That way many customers will rather keep paying for the cloud service than going through the hustle and headache of moving their data somewhere else.
Switching cloud providers should be as easy as switching your phone plan to a different provider.
Finally someone talking about it
Tbh, this (another another cloud video next week) are the direct result of just getting bummed out when talking to users via the support portal here at NC, who have like 100TB on a cloud, want to migrate over, but looking at around $3500-5000 JUST to retrieve their data in a timely fashion!!!
Hey Robbie, love your videos. Here’s an example for a typical home user: it is not easy to download years worth of pictures from Google Photos to local storage. You have to download in chunks of compressed files. Not very pleasant.
Plus, alongside having to use 'google takeout' and submit a download ticket (which takes time depending on the storage volume/quantity), it also strips the metadata from the images (providing you with images with metadata in .JSON files, which you then need to use ANOTHER tool to re-add. Absolutely bloody pain in the bum!
Sheesh. 😵💫 Glad I’m not paying the Danegeld.
Nice information
Thanks
Thank you for this video!!
I was researching how to make a backup of my old terramaster NAS to migrate to the new zimacube100, and man the prices and structure were not that clear and as cheap that they seem to make it be ( the cloud solutions)
Ended up buying a 2nd had 10 TB hdd to make my 1ry backup and then copy everything to my new NAS
While I personally would never save any of my private data in the cloud I do get it has a place, even a decent DIY 'cheap' NAS is probably going to cost as much as a few years of 'cheap' cloud storage. That said I've been in IT a long time and would rather any mistakes be my fault and localized to my NAS/LAN than trusting a cloud provider. The up front cost is higher and maintenance is all on me but I can live with that.
and given that you have been in IT for so long you should know better then to put all your eggs in one basket(nas only)
@@christopher480 I have 2 backups of all my critical stuff and 1 of the rest. I never said all my eggs were in one basket, wonder why you would assume different.
It just occurred to me, but how is your logo not you strangling a seagull? Get the artists on it!
I feel that might undermine my liberal, carefree and relax stance...the last thing I want people thinking is that I am in anyway aggressive...
..also, I've already got it tattooed on the back of both my fists.
@@nascompares We need stickers! 😀
*straightens papers on desk* now, let's be clear about this. If I see that sticker on my desk, that desk is gonna burn. If I see that sticker on my laptop, it's getting pulverised. And if I see you wearing that sticker.....well....
Man and nature, it never fails to amaze me negatively.
Great video and spot on, potentially in a way that may be beyond the scope of this video. Working with Microsoft Azure for 10 years I may shine some light on this concept not limited to Microsoft Azure only but other cloud vendors as well. Cloud data egress is a small aspect of the one thing that is solely missed in many Cloud Adoption Frameworks: leaving the cloud. Great documentation and strategies are available that can help move or migrate to the cloud and use the services available not limited to storage only. Almost no documentation is available for an exit strategy. I always urge organizations to have an exit strategy available to avoid turning the cloud journey into a 'Hotel California' experience.
And yes, you will pay for using storage one way or another. Either by expensive storage with low egress costs (a.k.a 'hot' storage) or cheap storage with high egress costs (a.k.a. ' cold' storage). Egress costs apply to ANY data 'leaving' the cloud.
Hope this helps!
"a Hotel California Experience" might be my favourite comment of the month..no..year. There, I said it!
I recently just got into a bit of bind with my Asustor nas crapping the bed and failing to initialize, losing local access to my data. I couldn't afford another equivalent storage solution so Asustor support could restore the data to another drive. Thankfully, I backed everything up to the cloud. I wiped the NAS and started fresh BUT because I don't want to pay to download literally terabytes of data, I'm leaving all that data till a later time when budget allows me to grab it all back. Definitely, going to put priority on a separate NAS solution to replace the cloud backup.
Thank is a real bitter sweet comment man. Genuinely appreciate that you shared the different take
@@Eshcole Asustor support Is totally incompetent And that Brand Is a waste of money And effort. Stay Away.
I built backup server using old PCs. This way any part blows, I can replace it relatively cheaply. I also use ZFS so I can always transfer the drives to another machine to retrieve my data. I am afraid of proprietary machines because of situations you got trapped in.
set up a site to site VPN like wireguard and access your home storage from anywere
Nice! Though, we should also highlight that the performance over wireguard will also take a hit on point to point
@@nascomparesWould be great to have a video where you show how to use wireguard, or a Synology/Qnap or one to other direct VPN and the limitations of each these solutions, or perhaps workarounds to get better performance.
An interesting calculation then is, when it becomes more cost-effective to upload some noise to increase your total stored amount of data so you can fetch more data back from the cloud per time unit (e.g. month) to recover from some massive data loss.
Good points, I have been skeptical of cloud storage for years but I never considered the egress part. I know enterprises are using the cloud and getting rid of on sited data servers/storage and I have been saying it is a bad idea for a long time.
Good video
Thanks bud
OneDrive, Google Drive and so on can be easily configured to do one-way sync from NAS to cloud storage. Not as good as real backup, but there is no egress charge. There are obvious advantages of the cloud, like "unlimited" storage, maintenance costs and so on.
Cloud = Someone else's server
Backblaze b2 is 6$/TB/month with 3x egress per month. As a home user with less than 1TB of critical data, im very satisfied. I only mirror to it every day. Even if the place burns down, it would be free to restore it again.
Cloud storage should be part of a 3-2-1 backup strategy as the final insurance against disaster recovery eg: Like Malware, fire, flood, theft , malicious act that takes out your two local copies. Even then you don't need to restore it all in one hit to recover, prioritize the data recovery. If you are relocating to another provider then you don't need to recover anything, upload your existing local data backup then and then delete data from the old cloud provider. Not sure to many businesses/people put all their data in the cloud, typically what is to important to lose or can't be long term archived. Remember a NAS on its own isn't a backup.
All good points. But I have now lost count of the number of companies that had poor data storage discipline and have 7-8 years of cloud data and no time to sort through it. Yet another egress pain in the arse, as a lot of the bulkier data is unviewable via the cloud portal
While I used to agree that cloud is part of 3-2-1, not anymore. Say a person looses their two copies at home, they go to download their 5TB of data from the cloud, then get hit with $16,000 charge for downloading. Or the company blocks their download at 50GB and holds the rest hostage untill the home user coughs up the $$$.
Often people are needing their cloud backup after a house fire, they lost everything, insurance is hagling them over payments for 6 months, meanwhile they are staying in hotels or with friends because they still owe mortgage payments on their non-existant house, and the cloud provider wants $$$.
I know big business loved to kick people whenever they fall down, but its frustrating.
Not to mention that even if you are able to download it, it often comes with some weird file organisation and document naming conventions.
Cloud; to me it is like blowing smoke... (pun intended)
This particular topic is about what you do not have direct control over, can, at times, bite you in the back.
Either the costs, limited abilities, sometimes even indeed sanctions to you.
To me it makes much more sense to have another NAS and use that as my cold-storage.
I see this scheme as some comparable level of leasing; you believe you are having a great deal but when you do the math in full (such as egress, indeed) you learn it will cost you a lot of money.
I've stopped using other people's servers unless it's for small stuff that goes to clients and gets deleted soon afterwards. I'd rather have multiple NASs and some HDDs secretly buried in the neighbours garden.
I am of the opinion that if your data is not on hardware that you own.... you no longer own your data.
This is just one more example.
I have what some people consider to be a MASSIVE amount of data. (35TB) Look at the costs to backup that much data.
Within a few months I would have paid for my Synology NAS (1522+ with 4x18TB drives, 2x1TB cache NvMe + 10Gbit card)
I think it only makes sense to use cloud storage for BS stuff like random memes and 'pron'
Yep. It just sucks that NAS/Private server ownership will never, NEVER be as simple and convenient as cloud. They will always have hat advantage...
I watch you videos just to hear you chime in with "I hate seagulls"'
Ouch! There's the knife! Right between the shoulder blades....
I get that they have to make money as a business, but that doesn't mean f**k the customer when the need them the most (local backups lost)
Seagulls are nice, but sometimes loud.
Use the buddy system , put a second nas at friend house and backup to that , and let him store his second nas at your house .
I have my backup NAS in garage about 60ft away from the house so unless it's a massive gas explosion or if some breaks into the garage and house at the same time I should be safe .
When I went on holiday I hide my drives from the NAS , and made a copy of the stuff I could get back .
The problem with NASs is that you store I lot of junk , eg backup of laptops etc which have died years ago , or full backup of a virused machine hoping to restored it after but finish doing a nuke and start again, and stuff you have downloaded for windows xp when that was they main system in 2006.
I was trying to talk my friend into this, but I think he would want encryption as well. Maybe there's a way to give him is own encrypted share, not sure. Or simply carve up my NAS's storage in some way where I can put his share on his own volume, and encrypt the whole volume.
I was all day out sailing today and when I saw seagulls it immediately popped to my mind that you hate seagulls!
I mean...I am flattered. But also, APPALLED
The sheer amount of arguments I've had with people on this very subject.. 9/10 I get shot down and overruled... Until the bill comes where I sit with a smug grin on my face and a hot steaming cup of 'told you so' soup.
EXACTLY! *sighs aggressively*
IMO, people who say a NAS is not a server, may be younger people, who don't understand the history of servers. Or even the very name server. A server provides services. In other words, client computers use the server's services, whatever they may be. A traditional server is a computer whose main purpose is providing services ( OS level and app level) versus a single user using it as their primary computer.
Cloudflare does R2 - S3 compatible storage, no egress fees. 10GB / month free + $0.015 per additional GB / month. Class A operations: 1M operations / month free + $4.50 per additional million operations. Class B: 10M operations / month free + $0.36 per additional million operations
So what is the alternative? Building and maintaining your own 2-3 servers and placing them in collocation DCs? Do you understand this still will infer the same data transfer problems but it with much higher TCO?
You could create two 60TB servers with RAID on each (£2000 each ex VAT - DS423/923 and 4x 20TB), store them at 2 locations in backup/sync..and for £4000 you just created a HUGE backup, that you permanently OWN. Now, price up 60TB of storage on the cloud over..let's say... 3 years. Wanna compare the TCO there? That's not even talking about egress... OR...if you wanted to pull 60TB from the cloud, where would it go? ...why..... A server.
I'm not saying cloud is bad. I'm saying it's bad as a primary backup. You could even just buy 1 60TB server for 2K and then have cloud as a backup of that...not even 60TB...just 10-20TB of 'mission critical' data....
@@nascompares how do I get two free locations with internet, now?
@@nascompares also "permanently" or not, disks break over time
@@nascompares if I wanted to pull 60 tb from any backup and it has nowhere to go, then it's a brain problem regardless. Not mine, those who suggested it.
If you had two servers, one is for backups, and the other one is dead, you better get another server instead of trying to set everyone up on the backup host.
@@nascompares I'm not sure what you mean by "primary backup" but I agree any urgent data should have a local and fairly quickly available backup, regardless if it is a local storage or cloud.
restored a customers 50GB of data using carbonite, took over 2 effing days
not even 1MB/sec for majority of time
I mean, notwithstanding the subject of this video, that sounds like AGONY!!!!
A NAS, gB internet and usenet is the way.
This is the way.
These are highly unreasonable costs. Thank god I built my own backup machines, two copies so two machines, using old PCs.
Nice 1!
Sorry that I could only give you a single Thumbs Up on this one.
Cloud has a lot of great merit, a major benefit being reduced TCO. At least today. The price is ability to control your own destiny. Egress charges will be a key tax for having that privilege. The only hope companies (and us peon consumers) is having effective competition. That stated, most companies could not afford or take the risks involved in transitioning their company ecosystem between clouds. Seems kind of scary actually. Soon your data will be the lever for them to make what was a cheap solution suddenly be not quite so.
Cloud storage pricing is not transparent. Best to have local storage
This wouldn't help everyone, but i know backblaze will fedex you a hard drive with your data for free as long as you return the drive.
i made me nexcloud at a external provider. no egress costs at all
In general I don't use cloud. I think it is only viable for big companies. Middle and small will be overhelmed by the costs. Huge ones will create their own infrastructure and even sell access to it (Amazon). I think I will be forced to use that crap just to learn, but that's it.
And in general - you cannot cheat physics and economy. Moving that amount of data back and forth must use either crazy amount of energy (which costs money) or crazy amount of time (which costs money). Data locality is the king.
First 35 seconds so annoying, in the sense apparently these posts by people seem to fail to understand that a NAS is literally a server. In that a server provides some sort of service for clients. Could be acting as a file server. A web server. A cloud server. A database server. Or some or all of the above. My NAS can act as a web server, cloud server, file server, and many more applications. It's a NAS. But it's literally a server, it's primary function is to provide services for a client, in my case, mainly my desktop PC. A NAS is all or partly targeted for being a file server, but as a typical NAS is running Linux, it often does more than that. Of course your video explains a lot of this. But IMO, the main point is...you don't normally directly use your NAS in the way you would directly use your laptop, desktop, tablet, etc...because it's a server ( in fact, I can telnet into my NAS, and for all I know, edit and compiler C++ using vi...but I don't)
One more point, is WHY DOES IT NEED TO RUN VMs to be a server?! Ok, look, I just turned 59, like last week. Been a software professional for pretty much my whole adult life. So I have seen a lot of computing hardware, and worked with a lot of computing hardware. And in my experience...the definition of server is .... "A computer system whose raison d'etre is to provide client computers one or more services, and to make this clearer, it's primary role is not direct use by users, but indirect use via the services it provides".
Technically yes you are correct, a NAS is a general computing device. You can do whatever you want with it.
But the name implies its primary focus and design - Network Attached Storage.
They usually are underpowered devices designed with a larger bay number for bulk storage of files.
Meant to be a cheaper way of having readily available storage.
They aren't necessarily performance orientated.
Versus a server which has a more powerful and capable processor and you can get them with a large number of bays with redundancy and oodles of performance.
You can add in a SAN to separate storage from the compute.
My washing machine is a "server" that offers a service for me to get notifications when its done washing and if I could modify it, I am sure I could get it to do stuff it was never designed for.
@@ArmChairPlum Why call it an underpowered server, if it can do exactly what you want to do with it? Do we call a general laptop underpowered because people can't play the AAA video games on it, even when the intended use is not to play AAA video games? It's just a different spec for the intended use. But I guess we have devolved into the area of semantic discussions, which I admit can be a big waste of time. Ok, I followed your logic, but personally, I consider my NAS to be a server, and I do more with it than just serve up files, but it was definitely marketed as a NAS.
A nas is a nas, use it as a nas.
Don't use other apps on your nas it's another point of failure in the aspect of security, use a nas as storage only..
Egress speed/cost don't mean much when you have lost all your local data. That's why it makes much more sense to use cloud providers for backup/archive purposes only (preferably encrypted before upload). It is some sort of insurance: you store data in the cloud for cheap and you hope that you will never be needing to restore lost data from there. Amazon S3 Glacier Deep Archive storage is the paramount of this idea. Very cheap storage fee and quite expensive egress (more than that, you need to wait several days before you can download data after the request). You upload and store your backup and you will never need to restore. Or restore once i a lifetime when something serious (God forbid) happens with data (is stolen with hardware or destroyed by a disaster)
That one day of restore will erase all the savings you made till then. Also in your case you would still need to run on-premise backup machines, so why not run another machine which does the same job as AWS S3 Glacier ?
Oh also don't forget Cloud providers don't make any claims with respect to your data and it 100% being protected.
Eg if it was to be corrupted or if a mistake caused data loss.
🕊️ 3:00 🕊️
You son of a...
The cloud for data storage or backup is a terrible idea. I'll use high-end Samsung phones and Apple iPhones as an example. Neither of these supports microSD slots and instead asks you to use the cloud. The cloud is slower than a microSD card. It costs more in monthly payments and bandwidth charges than microSD cards. The cloud and internal memory are less secure than microSD cards (if you only carry the cards you need that day). Encryption is never as good as not giving others (FBI, NSA, local police, hackers, etc.) access to the data in the first place.
And also remember that cloud is just somebody else's computer
Bezos needs to pay for his yacht somehow
How is this different from ransomware?
here on planet earth....its common knowledge that clouds disappear....
Wasabi
Fairplay wasabi.com/glossary/egress-charges
Everything except Backblaze is just obscenely overpriced. Backblaze is just regular overpriced. As in your own setup amortizes within about 2-3 years. But Google for example, easily within 12 months including energy and all the recommended backupsystems.
Used 12 bay Server with all required hardware to operate: 430
4 non helium filles no shenanigans 10TB Enterprise disks for a ~27TB RAID5: 800
wow you have some way out scenarios going on there......If I was in Dubai doing a video promo dont think I would be dumb enough to put all that video in the cargo hold on the plane.......fyi not everyone is a youtube creator and needs to keep around tbs tbs of data.....heres a thought....delete some stuff.
Egress < Seagulls
Fffffffffff...
While your argument is entirely correct, your examples are rubbish (to be honest).
If you use cloudstorage to store 'desaster recovery data' your financial calculation
MUST foresee to at least once recover that data ... or else, how will you know that
it works at all (if you never tried it). So, the cost for this cannot come as a surprise
to you. You either accepted it, when you made the decision to go for the cloud,
or your mistake already happened when you did your calculation.
If you want to leave the cloud, you do NOT cancel your contract all in a sudden.
You cancel, when you either have brought your data back home, or when this
process is on the way and the end can already be seen. What you do NOT do is
to cancel and then find out, that the remaining time of the contract is not
enough to copy back your data. The usual process would be to stop uploading
new data to the cloud and start retreiving that much data per timeunit as
your contract allows .... and then, near the end of this process, cancel the contract.
So, your video has a valid core of facts and arguments, however, your examples
aren't well thought through.
I think you missed one of the main points of the video. Notwithstanding that incremental migration of cloud data was covered in the 3rd part of the video, the real point here is that a lot of cloud users DON'T factor in egress. Highlighting ways to negate this impact are all perfectly valid, as well as highlighting that users SHOULD have factored this in on day 1 implementation. However the reality is that A LOT of users who have been sitting on cloud this past decade DON'T. That's the whole point. People who search for this video are either doing so because 1) they are about to sign up for a large scale cloud and are dismantling the T&C... or... unfortunately, because they just realised they are about to have a massively download penalty, or just received one and are querying. I agree with your points that these can be avoided at the outset with careful considerable and planning, but for many, this is closing the stable door after the horse has legged it! As mentioned, this video was made BECAUSE I have been addressing increasing support calls on users hitting this during cloud migration
@@nascompares Point taken! Probably I do not have the background (or lack of that) of the people you intended this video for.
I am part of a developement and maintainance team that operates a distributed platform on (behalf of our customer) that
has a monthly data throughput of about 400TB, much of which needs to be stored for a timespan of about 4-8 weeks.
On a regular bases we go through a discussion with our customer whether or not migrating the services from
'on-premise-hosted' to 'cloud-hosted' could be advantages (financial or otherwise) ... but in the end its almost always
the cost to access data in the cloud from outside the cloud that kills such ideas.
Fair play mad. You took my comment 100x better than I expected. I totally see your points and position too! Jesus, why can't every interaction on the web be like this! Have a fantastic week
Bittorrent sync....
Nope...gonna need more on that. Aside from capping D/L to a limit per month, and have X months to download everything..you will still hit egress limits on larger capacity clouds