Hi remember some time back in the spring there was talk abut lower the price in the end off the year . What the state on that and are there some place where one can see how much real data is use on the network total not test data
All the best
Sorry for spelling errors
Assumed the numbers from Grafana are correct, there is quite some interesting picture. The customer satellites as far as we know are AP1, EU1 and US1, while US2, Europe-North and Saltlake are considered test resp. beta satellites. It is my understanding that on the US2 satellite there might be real customer data if they agreed to beta testing and transfer.sh had been announced to store its data on Europe-North but I don’t know if that is still true.
For the remaining 3 the picture is like this:
And I think this is quite amazing. The amount up- and downloaded through US1 is really interesting. For EU1 we see that they have almost double the number of accounts compared to US1 but egress is only 1/6th of it. There is clearly room for improvement, maybe the Europeans are not aware yet of the price changes early this year, that made downloading much more affordable.
AP1 cant really compete with the other 2. Number of clients is low and ingress and egress are low too. A possible reason for that might be a language barrier (same could be true for Europe). Countries like Japan, South Korea, Thailand and others might benefit if there were localized versions of the project to lower entrance barriers. For me it is understandable: How to trust a project with my data, if there is a language barrier that potentially puts my data at risk. These number might give some ideas where marketing efforts could or should be put.
This data indeed looks amazing, though I want to note that I feel that the turnover of data is also much higher. My garbage folder is about half of what I get in ingress data, also backup up by the fact that I don’t see my nodes growing that much. Also my new node from 2 days has about 1.9GB of storage now with already 400MB in trash.
So yes, there is way more ingress, but that data also quickly gets deleted by the looks of it.
They could have this pattern:
So, take a look only on customer-facing satellites. However, it’s not guarantee that customers would not delete their data as well.
From the SNO point of view (I’m SNO too) they all customers regardless satellites while they pay for the service.
Do you have an account on the EU satellite? Why don’t you download your data more frequently now?
The reason could also be different security perceive. I am using the EU satellite for my personal backup and I wouldn’t use one of the big centralized services for that. Storj would have to increase the pricing for storage to scare me away…
Why don’t you? 
I’m in the same boat though. I have personal backups on EU1. And no, I don’t download them a lot. But it is important to get users on there either way. Even if it’s small time users like myself. Let them experience the benefits and great pricing, maybe their next job they work at a company with big data storage and egress needs and they will mention Storj. Right now the biggest priority is getting mind share.
Also keep in mind that there may be quite a bit of time before user growth turns into large amounts of data and traffic. The larger projects tend to need some time to implement things.
Though it would be nice to also have “monthly_active_accounts” as part of the stats.
You can check the used Data from Customers here (and its growth): Grafana
The board is still WIP, but shows already some numbers 
4 posts were split to a new topic: Looking at the data, does anyone have any guesses as to what caused the sudden jump in offline nodes in this chart (US2 Offline nodes)
I believe the free tier and the reduced prices should have an effect and attract higher bandwidth use cases, yes. This would certainly not mean that every user like you would completely change their usage pattern. But the pricing switch from storage focused to bandwidth focused this should reflect in the egress bandwidth usage.
Yes, accumulation is slow these days.
At the moment I would expect the invoice format is NoGo for customers in europe. For my personal backup it doesn’t matter but a company would not be able to handle “invalid” invoices.
I have never seen a Storj invoice so I cannot judge.
But my guess would be that as long as a Storj invoice is compliant with US law there should not be any problems.
You can see them in Settings → Billing → Current Billing Period → Billing History
Ok, so what is weird that they bill to an email address?
So yes, this would need improvement to at least be able to have a full company name and address on a bill.
After a year, let’s have a look at actual figures again:
Wow. I can see great progress since my last post. However some general observations still seem to be valid. AP region is still low. Reasons for that should be investigated. With countries like India, Australia, South Korea and Japan within that region there should be much more possible. Same goes for Europe where we still see much more Ingress data than Egress. Compared to the US region, where the Egress / Ingress ratio is even greater than one. Maybe it is still worth to have a look and try to find out why these numbers are different and we don’t see a similar Egress pattern for Europe.
But the overall development seems impressive. I hope the Filebase shutdown will not hurt these nice figures to much.
Wow, thanks for this awesome recap. This really puts the growth of the network in perspective. I obviously knew it grew, but not in what extend. Cool!
BTW, is it only me who’s bothered by lack of y scale on these graphs? IIRC Grafana automatically figures out the min/max, but it doesn’t display them.
Actually that field is a “Show Value” Field, the graph in the background is more a gimmick (without an option to show y values), i could remove that, so there would be only a plain value.
What you can do is click on the value and select explore, then you will get an graph 
I am using US1 so about 30TB being used so far. Its been pretty good and not painful to use.
