Amazon S3 Glacier Reviews

Our source metadata used for analytics and data lake was kept on Amazon S3 Glacier. Amazon S3 Glacier is a very cheap storage, where we store infrequently used data. If we have a large amount of data that many people are not accessing, we keep it in Amazon S3 Glacier to save the cost.

Users have to pay much less for storing data in Amazon S3 Glacier. However, it is costly to access the data from the solution. If somebody requires a large amount of data kept in Amazon S3 Glacier, that will cost a lot.

Amazon S3 Glacier becomes very costly when used on a big scale. Although Amazon S3 Glacier is cheap, its data retrieval cost is very high compared to other solutions.

I have been using Amazon S3 Glacier for four and a half years.

I rate Amazon S3 Glacier ten out of ten for stability.

Amazon S3 Glacier is a highly scalable solution. More than 100 users were using the solution, and we plan to increase the usage.

I rate Amazon S3 Glacier ten out of ten for scalability.

The solution's initial setup is very easy. I rate Amazon S3 Glacier ten out of ten for the ease of its initial setup.

Someone with a little knowledge of the solution can deploy it in a day. One person is enough to deploy the solution.

Amazon S3 Glacier is very cheap, but the cost becomes a concern when you have a very large amount of data. We used to spend around $ 200 a day on the solution.

Amazon S3 Glacier is a cloud-based solution. Amazon S3 Glacier is the best alternative for users who have to access a large amount of data.

Overall, I rate Amazon S3 Glacier a nine out of ten.

We use the platform for building data packages and storage, which involves efficient data handling and backup solutions.

The platform provides reliable and scalable storage, secure data encryption, and easy data retrieval options.

The product could be improved in terms of the customer support team's response times. 

I have been using Amazon S3 Glacier for more than four years.

The product is highly stable. 

The product is highly scalable. 

We rarely need technical support due to the comprehensive documentation available. However, the response time needs improvement. 

The deployment process was straightforward and typically takes 15 to 30 minutes, depending on the configuration requirements.

The pricing is average and reasonable. It varies depending on the region.

I recommend Amazon S3 Glacier an eight out of ten. 

We use it for our products, mainly as a source for some data, like a type of S3 bucket.

It's mostly used for current product data, not archival data. We use it for things like customer demos, training for customers, and also storing large configuration files.

The reliability of storage is the main benefit.

The pricing is a bit expensive. There is room for improvement in costs.

I have been using it for a couple of years. 

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten.

I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. It is a very scalable solution.

There are around 50 end users using this solution. We do plan to increase the further usage.

The initial setup is straightforward once you get used to it. It's automated for us now, so in that sense, it's very easy.

We need about ten DevOps guys for the deployment. 

We pay a monthly licensing fee. It is expensive. 

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. I would recommend using this solution. 

I would suggest just go through thorough AWS training and some of the training courseification programs.

If I construct many web servers, it would need network and OS settings. It would also need security. Amazon is a comprehensive solution.

The product has many files and graphics. It is a very comprehensive tool.

The product is difficult to use.

I have been using the solution for one year.

The tool is stable.

The tool is scalable. I am the only user.

Support costs us more. So, we do not contact support. There are no good companies in Japan that provide support for Amazon.

The initial setup is complex. The deployment takes two to three days. I studied an Udemy course to do it. It was difficult.

Programmers and system engineers do not find the tool to be difficult. However, it is difficult for others. I would not recommend it to many people. Overall, I rate the product a six out of ten.

We use it for archiving.

The pricing is low, and it's dedicated to archiving is valuable to us. 

So that's a good thing because you don't have to pay a lot when you don't use your data.

There is room for improvement in handling GDPR compliance better. GDPR is about personal data protection and retention. It would be great if S3 Glacier could handle compliance items related to this, especially with upcoming legislation like the California law, which restricts data storage time and allows users to request data deletion. 

Currently, if you're using Azure, you have to bring data back in a tiered process, which can be slow. If S3 Glacier could handle compliance more efficiently, it would add value.

Because GDPR is coming, and it will monitor data retention. In Quebec, we have Rule 25, which concerns data property and the ability to request data deletion. Handling this directly from Glacier would be a significant improvement.

The customer service and support were good. 

Positive

The price is fair. I would rate the pricing model a two out of ten, with one being the lowest price and ten being the highest price.

Maybe avoid reading data from S3 Glacier or processing data from there, as it can be very slow.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I work in a school. We have a lot of graphics, videos, pictures, and multimedia data. We use the solution for data backup.

The product is easy to use. The restoration is not as complicated as we thought it would be. Thankfully, there hasn't been a situation where we had to recover everything.

The stability must be improved.

I have been using the solution for almost two years.

The tool is stable. I rate the stability a six or seven out of ten.

The scalability depends upon the product’s versions. Generally, the tool is scalable. Currently, we are backing up around 9 to 10 TB of our data.

The support is good. The support team is quite helpful.

We need the vendor’s support during the initial setup. The deployment took about five working days. We had to engage with the vendor and have multiple sessions. We scheduled the deployment and got it done.

We pay a monthly licensing fee. The pricing must be improved. The solution must provide discounts for the education sector.

I would recommend the product to others. Overall, I rate the solution a six out of ten.

We use Amazon S3 Glacier for HPE 3PAR saving, content restoration, and deep storage for hosted data storage.

We like that the price is cheaper.

I would like to see the retrieval time reduced. You have to wait a day to get your data. 

You have to wait for six servers and generate your request to get your data out. If that time period could be reduced to an hour that would be an advantage.

It would be helpful to have an Emulator tool to mount the storage without the need for a third party. Normally, when we mount Amazon s3 Glacier onto, an on-premises solution we need the Emulator tool. It would be great if there was direct access to mount it.

I have been using Amazon S3 for two years.

It's a cloud-based solution. We are always using the latest version.

I have never communicated with technical support.

We are working with the standard Amazon S3, and Amazon S3 Glacier.

Previously, we did not work with any other solution. Amazon S3 Glacier was the first one that we used.

It's a cloud-based solution, there is no installation.

There is no license, you pay for what you use.

I would recommend this solution to other users who are interested in using it.

I would rate Amazon S3 Glacier an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for migration. 

The product takes more time to secure data when the bandwidth is low. 

I have been working with the product for one year. 

I would rate the product's stability an eight out of ten. 

I would rate the product's scalability a nine out of ten. 

I would rate the product a nine out of ten.