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're a tech company, so we use a variety of solutions, but S3 Glacier is what we currently use for the database. 

We use it both internally for our own projects and our clients. We host some projects on Azure and AWS, depending on client requirements.

It's mostly used by enterprises for hosting various solutions.

We get free credits from Amazon, and we like the overall stability. We haven't had to rely heavily on their customer success teams, which is a good sign.

With hyperscalers like Amazon, things are generally pretty smooth. As long as the product is stable, billing is clear, and we don't have issues, we're happy.

Billing issues can be a nightmare. It's tough reaching the right person to get them sorted out.

I have been using this product for about three years. 

It is easy to scale. That's a major reason we use both Azure and AWS. They're very scalable.

We have around 35 end users using this in our company. 

When we have to reach out to them, it becomes an issue. They can improve, but we don't need them frequently anyway.

We don't get the right people right away. They connect us to someone who doesn't know, and then it goes in a loop, and we have to be very patient to find the person who can actually solve our problem.

Positive

We use Microsoft Azure services. But the usage depends on the client or the purpose. 

Some enterprises are typically on Azure, while others prefer AWS. We're cloud-native, so we don't differentiate between the two, but it depends on the client's needs.

My tech team handled it. It was a matter of hours, not days.

One person should be enough.

We have seen an ROI. That's why we're using it. We see value in the return; otherwise, we wouldn't continue.

Mainly on the cost side, It's very easy to use, which leads to cost synergies. That's how we look at it.

If it were cheaper, I'd be happier. I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive. 

It is a yearly basis license. There are some other services that are linked with it as well. 

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

We use the solution for storing file objects.

The solution’s storage management is good and dynamic.

I have been using this solution for the past year. I’m currently using the latest version.

The product is highly stable. I rate it a perfect ten.

The solution is highly scalable. Not individual users, but a specific application is using it within our company. I rate its scalability a perfect ten.

The customer service and support is good.

The initial setup is straightforward. With a couple of clicks, you can set up the solution. First, create the S3 bucket and then get the URI. Our DevOps team mostly deals with this area.

We don't pay for licenses. We pay based on consumption data, considering how much data is stored.

I recommend the solution. It's an effective native solution. It should be the first choice for storing files in AWS. Overall, I rate the solution a perfect ten.

I use Amazon S3 Glacier to store large files and documents for long-term archival purposes.

I find Amazon S3 Glacier valuable for storing various documents like purchase orders, standard documents, and drawings. It complements my setup where the files are stored in S3, and the main application is hosted on EC2 containers.

In terms of improvement, I would like to see improved storage capacity and enhanced security features for better protection. The advantage of being on the cloud allows for scalability, so increasing storage as needed would be beneficial.

I have been using Amazon S3 Glacier for a year.

I would rate the stability of the solution as a nine out of ten.

I would rate the scalability of the solution as a perfect ten out of ten. We have approximately 50 users of the solution at our company.

The initial setup is straightforward and it takes less than an hour to deploy it. Deploying Amazon S3 Glacier is straightforward since it is pre-integrated within the cloud platform. There is no need for additional integration efforts, and it is user-friendly, and suitable for average maintenance.

It is more expensive compared to on-premises solutions. Amazon S3 Glacier might seem pricier over three years than on-premise servers, but it has perks like lower upfront costs and no need for internal remote engineers. If treated as an operational expense, the advantages often outweigh the long-term cost.

For those looking to start using Amazon AWS, my advice is to consider AWS Lightsail for a quick and easy deployment. Setting up an account is straightforward, and it is a hassle-free solution. Overall, I would rate Amazon S3 Glacier as a nine 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. 

We mainly used the solution for file storage and hosting static websites.

Amazon S3 Glacier is a highly stable solution.

The solution’s deployment process is complex and could be improved.

I have been using Amazon S3 Glacier for three to four years.

Amazon S3 Glacier is a very stable solution.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for stability.

We have plans to increase the number of users for Amazon S3 Glacier.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for scalability.

The solution’s initial setup is straightforward.

The solution’s deployment takes around 15 to 20 minutes and can be done in-house. Two to three people are required for the solution's deployment and maintenance, including a developer and a cloud fundamental expert. They need to have a proper understanding of each different environment where the solution needs to be deployed.

We have seen around 300% return on investment with the Amazon S3 Glacier. With Amazon S3 Glacier, you save on infrastructure costs, security compliance costs, and the cost of employing technical staff.

Amazon S3 Glacier is not an expensive solution, and it has a pay-as-you-go pricing model.

The solution helped us to meet our compliance needs. We use Amazon S3 Glacier as a platform as a Service (PaaS). If you have a virtual server, you can create a copy of the solution on an entire virtual machine. In case it goes down or someone messes with the configurations, you could just easily activate the copy.

Amazon S3 Glacier is expensive as far as virtual machines and data storage are concerned. That's why I minimized the data storage as much as possible. Two to three people are required for the solution's deployment and maintenance. They need to have a proper understanding of each different environment where the solution needs to be deployed.

Amazon S3 Glacier works like OneDrive, and it's straightforward to upload or download from it. I would recommend the solution to other users. Hosting static websites is straightforward, but you need a specialist to guide you to deploy dynamic websites on Amazon S3 Glacier.

The solution is easy to manage, and I rate it an eight out of ten for its ease of management.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Amazon S3 Glacier can be used for storage and RDBMS applications.

Amazon S3 Glacier is a stable and scalable solution.

The solution's pricing is too expensive and could be improved.

I have been using Amazon S3 Glacier for two years.

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

Amazon S3 Glacier is a very scalable solution. More than 200 users are using Amazon S3 Glacier, and we have plans to increase the usage with the addition of new branches.

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

We pay a monthly licensing fee for Amazon S3 Glacier. There will be additional costs if you install other apps and features.

I am using the latest version of Amazon S3 Glacier. Amazon S3 Glacier is a cloud-based solution. Around eight people are needed for the solution’s deployment and maintenance.

I would recommend Amazon S3 Glacier to other users. Before using the solution, users should know its cost because it is too expensive based on the storage size.

Since Amazon S3 Glacier is a cloud-based solution, you don't have to worry about installing and maintaining a server on-premises.

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

I used the solution for firewall configuration and to configure rules and permissions.

Amazon S3 Glacier is a highly scalable and available solution. The most valuable feature of Amazon S3 Glacier is the on-premises data storage.

The solution's cloud storage is very expensive, and users may not be able to afford cloud storage.

I have been using Amazon S3 Glacier for one year.

I rate the solution nine and a half out of ten for stability.

The solution’s initial setup is very straightforward.

It takes less than five minutes to spin off a server. When it comes to deployment, the solution's deployment is faster over the cloud.

Amazon S3 Glacier is a cloud-based solution. Around five engineers are needed for the solution's deployment and maintenance. It is easy to integrate Amazon S3 Glacier with other solutions. I would recommend the solution to other users.

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