Petabyte class SNO

(public | private | home) data center == centralization
Besides that all nodes behind the same /24 subnet of public IPs will be treated as a one node for uploads and downloads. So, more nodes in datacenter - less data across them.
The same will happen with your home datacenter.

We want to have a lot of nodes across the globe, not in a few datacenteres. We should provide high resiliency and durability for the customers’ data.
I hope you understand the point.

OK.
I’ll just stick with 4 nodes. but I might lose interest if there is nothing more to do.

1 Like

Dude, face it as a passive income. Install, configure and let it run…collect at the end of each month :slight_smile:

2 Likes

Not exactly, the official requirements for uptime make it require active monitoring with possible waking up in the middle of the night to fix the node etc.
But this is not mining, there may not be enough clients to fill 20TB let alone a 1PB node.

1 Like

10 data centers in 10 different locations = as centralized or decentralized as 10 home users in 10 different locations

Configuring correctly uptimerobot makes it quite better than mining. Only needing the base monitoring of something happens…at least for my 7 nodes, it’s quite hassle free oftentimes.
But of course, not 1PB!

Both have their differences. While miners seem to require more upkeep in general, in one goes down and stays down for a couple of days, I just lose the income for those two days. On the other hand, while the node requires less upkeep (pretty much only updating it occasionally), if it goes down I have to drop everything I am doing and try to fix it quickly, because 5 hours and I lose much more than just the income for the time my node was down.

2 Likes

10 data centers would be better in this case, since data centers are usually more reliable than home networks.

Yup, absolutely.

I just wanted to point out that there’s no difference in centralization :slight_smile:

Why not 10PB?
if you loose 1PB due to being hardware, or just not having monitoring, or simply being away from home (as some of us are in corona times) - You could loose your entire node and would have to start over again.

The smaller the node, the better it will be, if you don’t want to spend time on hardware or software based redundancy.

1pb comes to about 1.5kW and I don’t want more than that heating the house.
Also it is a comfortable fit for a half height rack.

So no good reason really.

Decentralisation in case of Storj is having different ISPs, Locations, Disk Vendors/Hardware, supply from Power plants etc.
You can have best hardware but what if there be ISP or Power Plant failure in your area then 1PB of data goes offline. Even worse if there be more data shards of a file than everywhere else then files becomes inaccessible until You get online.

That is not how it works.

1 Like

That is indeed how it works.

1 Like

No. All my nodes are behind one ip address therefore I never ever get more than one part.
You need to lose lots of parts before any data is lost.

So your post -in which you didn’t cite anything- referred exclusively to kollo saying you get more shards. A simple citation would’ve made that a bit more obvious.

Because erverything else he pointed out was just right.

There is no evidence of this. From what I can tell a lot of SNOs running nodes at home see success rates of transfers around 75%. There are a few in unfortunate locations who see lower success rates for sure, but the alternative is not data centers, it’s other distributed nodes with lower latency. And if customers spin up in areas where those nodes with low success rates operate, they would see more action as well.

1 Like

I’d love to see some confirmed statistics on that. It would likely be a good question for the next town hall.

I think there is a whole thread here on the forum somewhere regarding SNOs success rates - perhaps one of the mods can point you to it

2 Likes