Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Cloud Data Storage Google Hardware

Google Storage Is Now Available To All Developers 62

Posted by CmdrTaco
from the you-put-yer-bits-in-there dept.
aabelro writes "Google has announced at I/O 2011 the availability of their Storage service to all developers without the need for an invitation. The service has been enhanced with OAuth 2.0 support, simplified account management through the API Console, a new EU storage region, and a new API version."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Storage Is Now Available To All Developers

Comments Filter:
  • Now if I could just use it to store the honeycomb source.
    • by rhook (943951)

      I wouldn't use it to store any source, you know Google looks at everything you upload. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if the TOS says that they can do whatever they want with the code you upload.

      • by chrish (4714)

        PROTIP: Encrypt anything "interesting" before storing it in the Cloud, regardless of whose Cloud you're working with.

  • by Skapare (16644)
    Why not allow rsync to work (via ssh for security)?
    • by vlm (69642)

      Why not allow rsync to work (via ssh for security)?

      Don't know The Answer, but rsync is legendary for using lots of memory during the sync process (and CPU)

    • by pjl5602 (150416)

      Sounds like you're assuming that it's a cluster of Linux servers (that they're going to give you access to) and it's a traditional file system interface underneath. I can almost certainly guarantee you that it's not. The interface you have is an HTTP looking endpoint. If what you want to do is backup data, you might want to take a look at duplicity. You should be able to drop in your Google Storage supported version of Boto and it should work. If you want to upload diff of content, I'm guessing you're going

      • Google offers a ton of APIs that all use OAuth for authentication. Sounds good on the surface until you actually try to use it.

        Have you ever tried to implement one of their APIs based on their documentation? Good luck with that. All of the google API documentation I have had to use is always lacking those little details that make the difference between having things work and being very frustrated. The docs get you 95% of the way there, and then you just have to hack at it, which sucks because there are

        • by batkiwi (137781)

          I agree the documentation is 95%, and this isn't a complete excuse, but every API also has fully working code samples in at least 1 language to get you that final 5%.

          Whether or not you'd count code samples as a part of "documentation" is debatable. It's nice that they're there, and they always save my bacon, but IMO if you can't read the spec and then write your own code then the docs aren't quite ready.

  • I don't get the logic behind this 'invitation' nonsense that companies especially Google employ. I do not get it. They did it with Gmail, Grand Central and Wave. With the latter, it just did not work out. Google lost more than gained. Why do they do it?

    • by Skapare (16644)
      Maybe because during the invitation phase they don't have all the servers installed, yet. In the case of just about anything Google does, they need a million servers. They tried to hire me three times to do this sysadmin stuff. Apparently the free roller blades isn't enough.
      • I beg to differ (Score:4, Insightful)

        by bogaboga (793279) on Wednesday May 11, 2011 @10:43AM (#36093770)

        Grand Central were doing fine. The moment they were bought, new registrations were stopped by Google. Shortly after that, registrations were 'by invitation only'.

        Question is: What really happened after purchase that necessitated this type of action?

        • by Anonymous Coward

          Isn't it kinda obvious? You get to learn the network between developers. You can track how information distributes, which conferences are influetntial, check if it's worth to sponsor hackatrones, which blog provide with information etc.

        • by Aladrin (926209)

          Any time Google buys something, it's instantly famous. I hadn't heard of Grand Central before Google bought them, but I was one of those who immediately signed up. I'm sure I wasn't alone, and the servers probably couldn't handle all of it right away.

        • Grand Central did invitations before Google acquired them. I was waiting for one.

        • by rhook (943951)

          Grand Central were doing fine. The moment they were bought, new registrations were stopped by Google. Shortly after that, registrations were 'by invitation only'.

          Question is: What really happened after purchase that necessitated this type of action?

          My guess would be that because Grand Central was not well known and everyone always jumps on new Google products, that Google decided to stop new registrations until they migrated the service to one of their data centers, and made it invite only after that so that their servers wouldn't get hammered. It is probably also a strategy intended to build public interest, people always want what they cannot have.

        • by pr0t0 (216378)

          GC was awesome! You could record conversations without the knowledge of the other party. The great thing about dealing with larger organizations is they already had a "call may be monitored" disclaimer so I didn't have to. It really did save my bacon once during a dispute with my mortgage broker...I got the rate we agreed on and victory was mine!

    • Skapare is probably right. Just as a resistor limits inrush current [wikipedia.org] into a reservoir cap or decoupling cap when an electrical device is powered on, an invitation system limits the inrush of new users to a system whose scalability hasn't yet been proven. But at first, when Orkut and Gmail were invite-only, I thought Google wanted to collect a map of who invited whom as a measure of determining which users knew other users personally and which users were likely to start inviting new users solely for the purp

      • by N0Man74 (1620447)

        ... and which users were likely to start inviting new users solely for the purpose of sending spam.

        I don't know if there is anything to that, but that's what I wondered as well. If done by invitation only, then it can create a chain that could allow you to break the links where referrals began to go to spammers.

        However... collecting data to show who knows who is certainly a valid guess as well.

      • by wgibson (1345509)

        But at first, when Orkut and Gmail were invite-only[...]

        Orkut was invite only? That must have happened after Google took over. When I signed up with the service the sign-up was absolutely open.

    • Two reasons come to mind immediately:
      • limited access means a smaller group to monitor for problems. Buzz, for example, went live across the board and had serious privacy issues. If they'd done it on a smaller scale, maybe they could have nipped it in the bud.
      • illusion of exclusivity makes the product seem cooler. You want what you can't have.
    • by cultiv8 (1660093) on Wednesday May 11, 2011 @10:58AM (#36093944) Homepage

      Why do they do it?

      Economist: To limit supply and create more demand for the product
      Programmer: To allow time for beta testing
      Business Manager: So the company is not responsible if something breaks
      Sociologist: Ingroup members will be positively biased towards the product, outgroup members will want in
      System admin: this job sucks, anyone got some weed?

      • by aprentic (1832)

        "Economist: To limit supply and create more demand for the product"
        The might be why a marketing guy would do it but an economist would probably disagree.
        A firm should not be able to affect demand by limiting supply. At best they can affect the price and quantity demanded, and that's only if it's a monopoly good.
        Demand is a function of consumer choice. If you imagine the econ 101 supply-demand picture it's the convex, downward sloping curve.
        If a single manufacturer of a commodity good reduces supply the marg

      • by aprentic (1832)

        "Economist: To limit supply and create more demand for the product"
        This might be why a marketing guy would do it but an economist would probably disagree.
        A firm should not be able to affect demand by limiting supply. At best they can affect the price and quantity demanded, and that's only if it's a monopoly good.
        Demand is a function of consumer choice. If you imagine the econ 101 supply-demand picture it's the convex, downward sloping curve.
        If a single manufacturer of a commodity good reduces supply the mar

      1. It provides a slower ramp-up, so they have more time to react to demand.
      2. It lets them map a network of you and all your friends, if they don't know it already.
  • because that's how they run their projects.

    anyhow, it would be extremely nice if slashvertisements would include the PRICING of the SERVICE. you know, like, normal advertising rules apply..(the free portion is a joke).

    anyhow, from the article,
    "GSD is currently not integrated with Google Docs and Google Apps accounts do not work, only regular Google accounts, but that is going to change in the future.

    Pricing is set at $0.17/GB/month, higher than that of the similar Amazon S3 pricing which is set at $0.15/GB/month for 11 nines durability and $0.1/GB/month with 99.99 durability. Uploading and accessing are the same at $0.1/GB and $0.01/1000 HTTP requests. Amazon has progressive discounts for storage in excess of 50 TB, 400TB, 500TB and so on. There is no SLA for GDS yet, but Google promises to provide one when the service will be open to all those interested."

    sounds like beta to me still. and how they promise to provide one when the service is open to all those interested if it's open for all interested now? uh? wtha? brainmelt.

    • by nedlohs (1335013)

      Currently it's free. You get the SLA you would expect for free.

      • by Chrisq (894406)

        Currently it's free. You get the SLA you would expect for free.

        You mean " You get the SLA you should expect for free". From a lot of the comments I see in open source software forums people expect a lot.and complain whan they don

    • by ginbot462 (626023)

      And I just asked for a invite too!

    • by Bengie (1121981)

      But with Amazon's recent downtime, they won't be able to lay claim to 99.99% up-time for at least 5 years, assuming they have no more down time. But yes, theeir data is still there.

      • by tlhIngan (30335)

        But with Amazon's recent downtime, they won't be able to lay claim to 99.99% up-time for at least 5 years, assuming they have no more down time. But yes, theeir data is still there.

        Actually, the 4 9's and 11 9's refer to Amazon S3 service, which is basically cloud storage. The sites that went down were using Amazon EC2 cloud server. The former is pure disk storage, the latter provides computation. You can link S3 to EC2 for permanent storage (ECB?), as otherwise it's upload your files, do your processing, g

        • by JimFive (1064958)
          11 9's would mean about .0003 seconds of downtime per year. That's something like 1 dropped packet. I don't believe that to be possible. On the other hand, it's also probably not detectable.
          --
          JimFive
  • by Anonymous Coward

    It sounds like this is similar to the Azure storage that Microsoft gives all MSDN subscribers. Granted, MSDN is not free, but if you or your company has already purchased a subscription, you can get quite a bit of storage, compute and and SQL Azure resources for free.

  • Like Amazon. Three years later. And costs more?

    Yawn. Wake me up when the world realizes these are ultracommodities and the real price wars begin.

  • Ooooh, goody! Now I can store all my important source code on hard drives owned by another software company!

    I have waited years for this.
    • Only wimps use tape backup: real men just upload their important stuff on ftp, and let the rest of the world mirror it ;). Torvalds, Linus
    • SO how does this work with their EULA, where by they claim that anything you store on their servers is technically theirs....???

  • Like Amazon. Three years later. And costs more? herve leger [regilt.com]

(1) Never draw what you can copy. (2) Never copy what you can trace. (3) Never trace what you can cut out and paste down.

Working...