Hacker News Reader

Comment by immibis | Hacker News Reader

It suffers the usual effect as seen in eg. Wayland. You think the problem is simple and make a new protocol that's simple. Then you find complexity in the problem and solve it with complexity in the solution. Then your protocol becomes as complex as the one you're replacing. There are reasons S3 does all these things.

ACLs, for example? How do you control who can access a file you uploaded?

Also, it costs about 20 times as much as Backblaze B2.

View on HN

If you need granular control, you can use S3. If you need the cheapest option out there you can use Backblaze. If your application is bandwidth heavy, you can use R2.

If you're a busy indie hacker who just want to be up an running with file storage under 5 mins and forget the whole thing even exists, you can use FILE0.

S3 is stuffed with features for a reason. It's the backbone of the internet so it needs to cover 100% of the use cases and more.

We really wanted Backblaze to work. However, there's not a single week it doesn't have downtime at least once or twice. It's really really not ready for production usage (trust me - we've tried in production and had to revert back to S3 after two major outages).

Willing to try wasabi next time.

I guess that's when you switch to a more robust solution. If all you want is to host a couple of gigs at most because you're just starting then you're optimizing for speed and simplicity.

Is that really true about Wayland? I'm no expert on the subject matter, just a regular Linux user. From skimming the discussions, however, Wayland is touted as a simpler alternative to X because it comes without 25 years of baggage and bolted on things that turned X11 into a complex beast. Also, the security model of Wayland is often praised.

All in all, I had the impression that while a lot of things are WIP, Wayland had taken a more holistic approach because it was able to learn from X11's mistakes. Has Wayland really that unexpected complexity that it's now as much a part of the problem than it is a part of the solution?

Wayland is simple because it lets someone else do the heavy lifting (the compositor).

Yes, it's true about Wayland. It started as a project to "let's just send pixels to the screen and remove the rest" and then it discovered why the rest existed, and reimplemented much of it in a more annoying or at least equally annoying ways.

If you are happy to run everything via the backend it is probably ok (no worse than a typical app with an app level DB login that had access to all rows and tables)

With async programming there is little load in forwarding it on, and that’ll be fine at low scale most of us use.

Probably a great option for profile pics to avoid upgrading your postgres instance to a costly one.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com