Amazon S3 Glacier vs. restic

As described in the use case, it is perfect for backup data storage where you do not expect to retrieve the data often. Think of it as a data dump; it is nice to know you have a backup, but it actually is expensive and somewhat difficult to retrieve everything.

Incentivized

• Glacier is an inexpensive solution to the problem of storing rarely-accessed data for years.
• You can configure S3 buckets to transition objects to Glacier with a few clicks.
• It is easy to get started with Glacier; there is little learning curve and few concepts to familiarize yourself with.

Incentivized

• Billing system isn't the smoothest to operate
• Recalling information from glacier can run slow depending on type of data
• Customer support

Incentivized

It is difficult to delete the data as you have to wait for inventory and then bucket modification has to expire.

Incentivized

Amazon Glacier isn't a direct competitor to the products I've listed; it could compare to the clouds/data warehouses each of these products use to store their data. In the case of CloudBerry, Amazon Glacier is used with it to create a complete archival backup system. That said, when using Amazon Glacier along with a product like CloudBerry, you can create a reliable, inexpensive cloud backup system for retaining HUGE quantities of data for much less than these other cloud backup solutions. HOWEVER, if you want to restore said data, the cost and complexity begin to become a major concern, so Amazon Glacier should only be considered in situations where you don't plan to touch the data regularly, if at all, once it's at Glacier.

Incentivized

• With this now we are storing data for less cost as compare to what we were paying earlier
• Increased the data access limits

Incentivized