~ 2-2.5 years sounds about right. It depends of course, so YMMV as they say.
1 Like
It took me 3 years to almost fill a 16 TB drive. Today it is back to 8 TB and I can only guess where deletes will stop.
4 Likes
Unless you are a supplier and your client is a giant monopoly like Apple or a car manufacturer like BMW.
If that’s the case then your are doomed as supplier. Because your client will tell you exactly what you have to manufacture, at what cost at your own risk and how much they will pay. With 90 day payment terms minimum.
And of course they have the right to cancel orders any time or reduce the total number they have committed. Of course without compensation or price changes.
And as supplier you have to open your books and show your calculations to them because they want to make sure you that you earn only what they believe you should earn.
So “normal” can be very different at times.
So sometimes if you really want to receive the order from a client, you have to play by the clients rules.
Bro, customers uploads could be from many locations, if data is from some security CCTV, etc.
or app that is used around the world, there for i wouldn’t worry about IF they can saturate Your download ability 
if SNO’s download is @littleskunk 's concern
for now i have 150TB on 1Gbps total, but if You want me, i can order 2nd paraller same 1Gb line,
or i see my ISP now offers up to 8Gbps/1Gbps for a total of like $47/mo
i would have to buy new network card to make use of that! lol
So the capabilities are within reach, for everyone to make some Upgrades if needed,
SNOs as the smallest cell, is also the most adaptable, as such, it needs a stimulus to respond.
Just bring the first tranche of data up to 80% space and i bet, You will see some good respond in growth of “added free space” and network if needed
3 Likes
Well it must be worth it.
I will be happy to upgrade disks and connections but Storj must at last bring the data along.
You cannot expect SNOs to sit on a stack of big disks and connections at $1.5/$2 and praying that data comes their way some day.
Payout is not sufficient for to hold them stand-bye at large.
But when the data flows and disk fill up I am sure some would be happy to invest.
But no upfront investment without data.
2 Likes
I believe the tests were done to see the available bandwidth and to confirm with the clients what should they expect. I doubt that Storj will ask us to upgrade the internet connection. Buying a drive depends entirely up to us and it’s an one time payment. Upgradind the internet connection depends also of ISP possibilities and it’s a monthly payment. At today’s egress rates, us paying more for internet just for Storj dosen’t justify, and at least I won’t do it.
For me, upgrading internet means adding a new fibre to the home, because I already have maximum speed that they offer. But the speeds are not guaranteed. At maximum traffic hours, they go down. At night, they can reach 9xx Mbps in some locations.
2 Likes
Yes, it would not make sense to pay 5 Euros more for your internet per month when Storj brings only additional $1,50.
2 Likes
I wonder if in the last 2 years, we lost paying customers?
I also wonder if the big garbage we saw this year is only from test data and closed free accounts, or some clients also left or stayed, but removed the data or a big part of it?
I wonder what would be the ration of retained paying customers/all contracted customers?
I don’t expect Storj to disclose this data tu us, but I ask it anyway.
Yes of course.
But normally there is no name dropping. But in the Town Halls there was the mentioning when it comes to growth. But according to it I think it was always said that there is more customer storing more data instead of large numbers of customers leaving.
1 Like
Every bit counts. As of now instead of adding drives, I would rather prefer every unnecessary data to be removed from the network that includes free tier data and garbage left behind by bloom filters. Also some node cleaning could help i.e. removing unnecessary files from temp folder and reducing size of dbs. Archived orders could be removed after 3 days instead of 7 days. Just archived order folder usually occupies ~1GB space.
Even if temp folder and dbs are handled, it frees up 1GB per node that leads to 24k nodes x 1 GB.
2 Likes
Strange thing… On my 104 ver. nodes, I don’t see any files in Temp folder anymore. Maybe the speed impruvements got rid of them.
I think one of the performance improvements was that files no longer get created in the temp folder but at their final destination.
1 Like
Yes I noticed that too but I wonder what happens to the older files.
Normally the plan should be to clear and delete the temp and the garbage folders automatically.
Yes, it would be great if we soon receive the working filewalkers that finish their jobs so that trash can be purged and databases updated.
1 Like
You are missing one critical point in your calculation. I agree that the math is saying we have enough bandwidth on the first day. But this is a function over time. Every day a few more nodes will be full. I care about the available bandwidth on the last day of the upload cylce and not on the first day. For that every node with free space counts. → Cleanup as much as possible.
Not really. I don’t see TSMC having any issues with Apple production. In fact Apple Chipmaker TSMC to Receive $6.6 Billion Grant to Step Up Production in the U.S. - MacRumors .
So no, the manufacturer isn’t going to go under on any deal. Unless he promises to deliver 1 billion lemons while only producing 10. But that’s not a “you’ll make what I want you to make”. That’s a “I simply can’t make that” issue.
In that case I would fire the entire legal department that OK’d that contract. But that’s just me.
As long as the rules make sense, I think anyone would. What I am trying (am I failing? looks like it) to get across is don’t run before you walk. (you: general, do I need to add this disclaimer anytime? I don’t know what is politically correct)
The highest bandwidth would be at the point of most not full nodes. I don’t understand why we need to analyze this that much. That’s the highest available bandwidth. Can the client work with that? Yes, he/she/it is welcomed. Is it too low for the client? Storj isn’t for them. Can’t make a car go faster if it is already pegged at the redline in final gear.
We could help figure this out if we got some clear answers instead of cryptic “that’s not the target” responses.
I’ll try my best though to “work with what I have”. The starting paragraph solves the maximum available bandwidth problem. That’s done and dusted, so all that remains is the minimum available bandwidth. Since I don’t know anything about the new case, I’ll assume that it’s either a CDN, or as someone mentioned, CCTV storage
Let’s go with CDN: If the client uploads files and the nodes are full, that doesn’t affect the client. If the client requires a website that has 30PB of ever changing data on it, then I don’t think we’ll be ordering drives one by one, but we’ll each book Western Digital’s factories for a couple of months. I don’t know about the rest, but I will also employ a 1K workforce to lay fiber 8h/day (1h lunch + 2 x 10mins smoke breaks, included). If the file is there, it will be served by the node. Currently storj can’t peg a connection at 100% all the time, so there is plenty of available bandwidth for this case.
Let’s go with CCTV. I’m all for having a giant amount of data streamed to us 24/7/365. Since most home connections are asymmetric, that works out perfectly: there is more down (=customer up) than up (=customer down). I’m sure that once a day that a random person wants to download that clip of his neighbor keying his car, can be accommodated, even without looking at any stats. What about the constant uploading by the client: if SNOs see “number go up”, then naturally they will also “number go up” with their capacity, both in space and in bandwidth.
To quote @Alexey: “See the difference?” Promising that every home could one day stream 10 streams to us all day long, isn’t the same as seeing that kind of traffic. Can the client work with X/Y amount of bandwidth? Yes, welcome. No, sorry. That’s using what you have.
Give me (=community) some ballpark figures and we’ll figure it out.
As I explained it is a fuction over time. The customer would need that bandwidth not only on the first day. So we have to caculate how much bandwidth is available on the last day of the upload cycle. Can we still hit the requirement? (The answer seems to be yes but again every additional node with free space gives us more bandwidth to work with)
I get that, I said it in my reply, it’s the minimum bandwidth. What I don’t get is the use case. Is it download or upload from the SNO’s perspective?
I would make the assumption that 50% of SNOs would add more capacity (space) if they saw it being utilized. Those of us that can, will add way more capacity than is proportional to us, so that 50% will offset the other 50% (if 50% add two drives, that’s covering the other 50%). I would also make the assumption that if we see that kind of growth, then we would also add network capacity. Again, that 50% has the potential to offset the other 50%.
An overall assumption is that the minimum bandwidth is 50% of the current bandwidth.