Hacker News
new
|
past
|
comments
|
ask
|
show
|
jobs
|
submit
login
cmer
on Feb 5, 2014
|
parent
|
context
|
favorite
| on:
How to Save 90% on your S3 Bill
It stores everything but the object
nathancahill
on Feb 5, 2014
[–]
Yes. If you're storing the objects on your server, why would you use S3?
cmer
on Feb 5, 2014
|
parent
|
next
[–]
Caching. We request the same objects quite frequently and bandwidth is killing us.
derefr
on Feb 5, 2014
|
parent
|
prev
|
next
[–]
Well, if the consumer
is
the server, rather than the server then serving the S3 data to a client, then I could see the benefit in the server caching retrievals locally.
ars
on Feb 5, 2014
|
parent
|
prev
[–]
S3 for persistence, the server for caching? Perhaps you have multiple servers that carry no state?
Consider applying for YC's Spring batch! Applications are open till Feb 11.
Guidelines
|
FAQ
|
Lists
|
API
|
Security
|
Legal
|
Apply to YC
|
Contact
Search: