How redundant/safe is object storage with "spaces"?

September 2, 2017 1.7k views
Storage

I'm looking at using the new "Spaces" object-storage solution for a project. Just wondering, what kind of redundancy is in place for data stored in this system? I want to be able to tell clients that their data is backed up and quite safe from hardware failures. Is this already the case with "Spaces", or will I need to implement my own redundancy?

2 Answers

If DO expects Spaces to compete with S3, they'll need to provide similar durability guarantees. (From Amazon's documentation, "Amazon S3 Standard and Standard - IA are designed to provide 99.999999999% durability of objects over a given year.")

As far as I know, no such guarantee has been documented for Spaces. (Please correct me if I'm wrong.) Given this and Spaces' early-access status, I'm working under the assumption that objects in Spaces could go up in smoke at any moment.

  • Hi there - I'm the product manager for Spaces.

    We have plans to offer an API availability SLA for Spaces and our team is working through the details now. We will share more as soon as we can.

    That being said, our engineering teams have designed and tested Spaces to withstand multiple kinds of hardware (e.g. host, disk) and network failures that could occur at the different layers of the stack.

    Re: the 11 9's of durability that is mentioned in AWS S3 marketing pages -- AWS only has an API availability SLA for S3. They do not offer a durability SLA of any kind.

It's up to you to back them up. You could probably write a script that uses the API to back these up.

Have another answer? Share your knowledge.