Thats an awful lot of FUD considering we’ve been using them for a while and not experienced any what you describe. Technical support has been fantastic, far better than the “traditional” CDN we moved from. Download speeds in North America are identical to our old CDN, and speeds improved drastically overseas for us. If you are in a region with poor peering performance, you should perhaps raise that as an issue, since they have fixed a handful of peering with providers in more remote regions, usually in a few days.
FUD?
As far as I know, FUD means fear uncertainty doubt. I fail to see how that is in any way connected to what I wrote.
We had this discussion before in the Storj forum 1-2y ago?
S3 performance is poor. Which is to be expected.
Storj calls their S3 something like “link share” and their native implementation just “native”
“Link share” are just S3 endpoints on rented AWS (I think they have a new provider now) that use the Storj network called “nodes” as a storage backend.
So yeah, of course your S3 performance can’t keep up with real S3 providers if you have to pay AWS plus the nodes.
So we discussed Storj performance for TrueNAS downloads before. Some users measured 80Mbit/s and worse performance in Italy, Germany and Switzerland. Some Storj employees defended the performance because some US users were able to reach 300Mbit/s. One user asked if 300MBit/s is within their performance target and got no response…
I don’t think it is that hard. For Europe you basically only need good peering at DE-CIX. If then the user still has poor performance, the users ISP has bad peering. Since my ISP offers great peering and caching (Init7), I can count the times I did download something below 100MBit the past 10 years on one hand. But I can right now go to truenas.com and download laughable speed of 62MBit on a 10Gbit line. In 2024. And that is a good day.
That was not the case before TrueNAS switched to Storj.
But of course this all depends on what goal you try to achieve.
Maybe TrueNAS thinks that 80Mbit/s is sufficient.
Storj makes no economical sense, at least not with S3. In the beginning Storj paid 20$ per TB to nodes, while customers paid 7$. It is now down to 2$. I don’t think TrueNAS pays 7$ so there is less than 5$ revenue left for Storj to buy traffic for their S3.
Storj employees always discredited that flaw, because “sooner or later customers will switch to native, because faster. S3 is just the industry standard. A temporary loss leader to attract customers”.
That is why I think it is very funny that even Storj partners like TrueNAS can’t be bothered to implement native Storj support and rely on their slow S3 service
Just for some good measurement, I just downloaded the TrueNAS SCALE 24 iso and then almost twice the size Ubuntu Server 24.04.1 iso.
TrueNAS: 33 seconds
Ubuntu: 6.1 seconds
At least this time the speed for TrueNAS was decent with 360Mbit/s.
Correct (as far as I’ve known it as well). I think it’s a term limited to sales and/or marketing (-i.e. relating to ethics). Meaning: if I were to tell you “grass is purple”; since I have no vested interest in you believing grass is any color whatsoever, that would just be a lie. *shrug*
Did i miss how Is going the contest or Scale release have upset the plans
Yeah, we got a little busy. Lemme update the thread and reach out to the winrars.
CORE: May the Valkyries welcome you and lead you through Odin’s great battlefield. May they sing your name with love and fury, so that we might hear it rise from the depths of Valhalla and know that you’ve taken your rightful place at the table of kings. For a great OS has fallen: A warrior. A friend.
Maybe with a meme folks start using snapshots!
And honestly, reading 2 thread about people hacked, Is scaring…
Get your protection now
…I don’t know how but I forgot to create snapshots for the last few years now - this is now done. Thanks for the reminder; I hope they never become useful.
not a case my snapshots run at 00:30
@awalkerix ACL Alert is up! ^^
Thanks, ChatGPT.