I want to use your cloud storage instead of S3. My main reason for using S3 is the DURABILITY (not reliability). S3 offers 99.999999%, which means it is replicated numerous times. Which means I DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT taking extra customer backups, it is "baked" into S3.
How is the durability for B2?
Their main disadvantage is that they only have one datacenter, unless they have gotten a second one recently.
Having said that, if your data is absolutely critical then I agree that even further geographic diversity would be desirable. Most likely you want to avoid the Pacific Rim, and volatile countries. A central European site/company would be good for this. Obviously you should expect to pay more to store your data in more than one place.
> if your data is absolutely critical then I agree that even further geographic diversity would be desirable
I think geographic distribution is absolutely critical if you need "uptime". But for pure durability I think multiple geographic regions is a red herring. What you need much more than multiple geographic regions is having your data stored in two profoundly different formats with two profoundly different vendors with source code written by two separate teams. Furthermore, I would pay for those with two separate credit cards.
The same software bug (or lack of payment resulting in Backblaze B2 or Amazon S3 deleting ALL copies of your data) will delete your data flawlessly across geographic regions. Every time.
Backblaze carefully chose our main datacenter to not be in an earthquake zone, and on a hill (flood proof), and not in tornado zone, and no hurricanes. I suppose that in the case of a meteor strike on a datacenter or terrorist attack some geographic regions would help, but that is really diminishing returns compared with software or human error.
If you truly value your data, two regions won't save you -> two vendors will.
Never thought of that. It is costly but still, great advice!
https://www.backblaze.com/b2/cloud-storage.html
"Reliability: 99.999999% durability."
I like b2 and am using it for backup in some projects, but unfortunately it's still not an appropriate choice as a primary data store.
The common counterargument I've heard is that you should have multiple redundant storage providers that you manage at the application layer anyway. Problem with that is, there are a near-infinite number of things I "should" do, but very finite resources to do them. S3 backs up across multiple availability zones by default, so using it means one less thing I have to spend brain cycles worrying about.
Restricting it to Germany would seem anti-competitive on an EU level, which is usually not allowed. But I don't know the laws.