-
Website
http://www.daemonology.net/blog/ -
Original page
http://www.daemonology.net/blog/2009-04-18-tarsnap-prepaid-billing.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
Top Commenters
-
Marton Trencseni
3 comments · 1 points
-
Ralph Corderoy
4 comments · 1 points
-
da44en
2 comments · 1 points
-
Jason Dusek
2 comments · 1 points
-
royce
9 comments · 1 points
-
-
Popular Threads
-
Supporting FreeBSD
3 weeks ago · 1 comment
-
Supporting FreeBSD
Thanks!
On the downside, I doubt I would have any of my current customers; and the few people using tarsnap wouldn't be anywhere near as enthusiastic about telling their friends about it. As a result, I'd have to spend a lot of time and money on marketing. I don't like marketing -- I'm not good at it, and moreover it would take my time away from working on making tarsnap better.
My only question, Colin, is what is the mitigated response to such an instance where Amazon cancels the particular service
in use. Or as in another situational case, Amazon corrupts data in this service rendering the backup unusable.
Firstly, I feel that both cases are quite speculative and not foreseeable. But when talking about backing up its always good to have
a backup plan for the backup plan!
So for the first instance (Amazon discontinues service). Would you see it quite conveniently possible to move the service to a set
of private servers or another commercial host without service loss (at least minimally).
The second situation seems even more unlikely. My questions here involve underlying storage practices (do they snapshot their systems
in the case of failures) and the guarantees of backup resiliency under stress. To clarify, what and who ensures that backups are being
protected against fault. I find it incredibly odd that some backup companies often disclaim that you should ensure you have your own
backups so that they aren't at fault if something happens. My only response to that is while it is always correct to have as many backups
in different locations (securely) as your data or paranoia requires, but that the backup service provider's sole purpose of existence is to guarantee
the CIA (confidentiality, integrity, and availability). I guess I'm more or less interested in the interpretation of liability for this kind of service
and not that this situation is very likely.
Thank Colin for your contributed work to FreeBSD and projects like this!
If Amazon silently corrupts data on S3, well, there's not much I can do about that. Corruption won't go unnoticed, but it's impossible to guarantee uncorrupted backups if you can't rely on the underlying storage to some extent -- I could replicate everything offsite, but (even leaving the issues of cost out of the picture) if I did that you'd just be asking what I'd do if S3 and my offsite storage simultaneously corrupted data. Everything I've seen of S3 indicates to me that Amazon is quite conservative about making sure that data will not be corrupted, so this isn't a scenario which I'm particularly concerned about.
Automatically charging a credit card as needed is something a few people have asked for, so it's certainly something I'm thinking of supporting in the future -- but the costs associated with that are quite high (e.g., I would need to store credit card data) and the prepaid log-in-and-deposit-money-when-you-get-an-email system seems to be working quite well, so this isn't a high priority.