I find Cloudflare R2 to be much cheaper as there are zero egress fees irrespective of data size. One is only billed on the count of requests with 10 million free download requests per month (check pricing for precise info).
If you do a clever bit of caching work in your app like we have with our apps Slyp and SlypBusiness, you could even make it insanely cheap.
We have a file manager that is ultimately responsible for images, files, videos and whatnot. It loads the images/files from the downloaded local cache when requested by a feature in the app.
A standard feature uploads and downloads using signed urls obtained from the backend service. The manager increments the file's version in the backend on each successful upload. For download, the manager compares the version against the locally cached version. If there is an update, the new file is downloaded in the background and overwrites the local cache and notifies all features using the file inside the app.
There's no catch. They don't care about the bandwidth. If 20 million people make a single request each then you'll pay $3.60 to cover the requests.
And you're going to have to pay $15 of storage costs for your terabyte.
The tl;dr for anyone skimming the comments: "CloudFlare doesn't like you" in this case means a gambling site that was getting CloudFlare shared IP addresses legally blocked by ISPs in countries where the gambling site wasn't licensed/was illegal. And "abusing low prices" means CloudFlare wanted them to pay for a bring-your-own-IP plan to give them dedicated IPs so their blocks wouldn't affect other CloudFlare customers.
Cloudflare was really unclear about their motivation was and it was effectively a matter of kicking them off for not liking them. CF was annoying them about an overpriced enterprise plan, before suddenly throwing out accusations that if true would have meant cutting the company off even if they did buy enterprise. And they were demanding a ton of money, much more than bringing an IP is worth.
Maybe maybe bringing their own IP would have solved the problem, but Cloudflare was obstructing everything and then did a cutoff without proper warning. It was really bad on Cloudflare's part.
elendilm · · focus · HN ↗
If you do a clever bit of caching work in your app like we have with our apps Slyp and SlypBusiness, you could even make it insanely cheap.
We have a file manager that is ultimately responsible for images, files, videos and whatnot. It loads the images/files from the downloaded local cache when requested by a feature in the app.
A standard feature uploads and downloads using signed urls obtained from the backend service. The manager increments the file's version in the backend on each successful upload. For download, the manager compares the version against the locally cached version. If there is an update, the new file is downloaded in the background and overwrites the local cache and notifies all features using the file inside the app.
AznHisoka · · focus · HN ↗
Dylan16807 · · focus · HN ↗
And you're going to have to pay $15 of storage costs for your terabyte.
someonebaggy · · focus · HN ↗
Cloudflare can shut you down and charge an arbitrarily high price if they don't like you and feel you're abusing their low prices.
kalleboo · · focus · HN ↗
Dylan16807 · · focus · HN ↗
Maybe maybe bringing their own IP would have solved the problem, but Cloudflare was obstructing everything and then did a cutoff without proper warning. It was really bad on Cloudflare's part.
someonebaggy · · focus · HN ↗
They really hated that particular customer.