The trash is unpaid?

I’m all for that. How to improve on 7 days retention rule?

And the same applies to all ingress being unpaid and uploads without consequent downloads not being discouraged. This makes the back-ups storage scenario I described a cheap if not free use case for customers and Storj but expensive for SNOs.

It will not change, sorry. We need this mechanism to protect customers from possible bugs when the data could be wrongly deleted.

1 Like

That’s all fine if Storj would pay for it. At the moment it is solely on the SNOs to bear the cost for this safety net that Storj wants to have.


That would be fair. Even if not the regular rate but only 1% of it it would give Storj an incentive to care about this storage rather than wasting it carelessly at the expense of SNOs.

1 Like

Exactly. That would make sure they don’t use it excessively because it is free storage.


Unfortunately they won’t/can’t pay for it, because Storj customers don’t pay for their deleted data, so of course they can’t pay SNOs for trash data. Haha. That’s a fact. It’s not fair for SNOs but understandable, if you use a cloud storage service, would you pay for the data that you deleted? I don’t think so.

1 Like

Of course it’s not understandable. SNOs have nothing to do with Storj’s relationship with customers. It’s their business and their decision what to charge and what not. We’re talking about Storj’s relationship with SNOs. Does Storj store trash data? Yes it does. So why doesn’t it pay for what it uses?


As far as I know this was introduced as a temporary measure… Years ago. :joy:

There you see it. It’s temporary, it’s free, let’s keep it.

The strange thing is they made an option to disable trash but don’t allow us to use it.

# move pieces to trash upon deletion. Warning: if set to false, you risk disqualification for failed audits if a satellite database is restored from backup.
# pieces.delete-to-trash: true

You can use it, but the node will get disqualified if Storj will rollback the satellite databases at some point.


Not necessarily. But it can get disqualified if the satellite restored pieces that are no longer present as they have been deleted. If these pieces then get audited your node has a high risk to get disqualified.


I don’t see it this way. My belief is more like: as long as SNOs accept free risk hedging for satellite software, Storj accepts that SNOs will game the /24 system :rofl:

It’s as temporary as the temporary tax rate raise from 15 years ago in my home country :cry:

Does the node verify (or have a way of doing so) the timestamp when a file was deleted by the customer? Or does it just trust what the satellite tells it? If the node has no way of verifying it then causing the nodes to store the trash as long as possible is not only irresponsible but could be a gold mine too.


Can you elaborate that ?

Well, it’s simple. Does a satellite have a way to pretend a file is deleted but continue using it thus avoiding paying for the storage? I’m not saying it does so but is there a technical possibility for that?


I reached the same conclusions too, a few months back, when the big trash cleanup started. If the trash is not payed, it can be abused.
Why should we trust Storj? Storj dosen’t trust us. And it’s the same thing for community satellites. In order to be a well constucted trustless system, both parties or all parties should have ways to verrify each other.
Or pay for the trash stored and I don’t care where the data lays, in blobs folder or in trash folder.
I get that customers don’t pay for trash; trash dosen’t make money for Storj. Trash is a safety net for devs if they screw up. But why should we take the fall? I rent my space. I don’t care how Storj uses it and what is that data containing or where is placed. Storj software uses XTB/month, so I expect to be payed XTB x 1.5$. It’s simple as that.


No, only in a reverse case - if the node was unable to restore pieces, which are now requested to audit. We made a change, that if the piece is requested for audit, but it’s in the trash, the piece would be restored and the team would got a notification.

1 Like

Yes, because it’s signed by the customer’s uplink and the satellite. The trust is not required.

nope. Cryptography will not allow to do so. The metadata is encrypted too on every level.