Sorry, that would be for S3 Infrequent Access. Glacier would be about $4 per year.
> On Dec 13, 2016, at 10:48 AM, Cary Gordon <[email protected]> wrote: > > Amazon Glacier would run about $7 per year for 46GB. > >> On Dec 13, 2016, at 10:43 AM, Eric Lease Morgan <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Can y’all recommend how I might preserve and archive 46 gigabytes of >> personal data for the long haul? >> >> For the past thirty years the librarian in me has been preserving and >> archiving my personal and professional data. It started out as a few text >> files, a couple of .exe files, the rare MacWrite file, and a growing number >> of HyperCard “stacks”. Then I moved away from proprietary word processing >> files and migrated to plain text documents as much as possible. These >> included scholarly documents, computer programs, and selected email messages >> in the form of mbox files. Still various flavors of images, movies, and PDF >> crept into my mix. And believe it or not, I print some of my text files, and >> I have printed major components of my images. >> >> For a while 3.5” discs were sufficient as a storage medium, but the pile >> grew and grew. I then moved to CD’s — migrating my 3.5” discs along the way >> — and the pile grew and grew again. Five years ago I migrated to DVD, and >> that was good for a bit (all puns intended). But now, as I catch up I have >> discovered that my archival output is close to 46 gigabytes of data just for >> the year 2014. Much of this data is really images, but not just pictures of >> my pet, but rather a sort of story. >> >> What medium do you think I should use for archival preservation and storage? >> At 4 GB/DVD, I can’t afford to burn more than 10 DVD’s/year. That’s >> impractical. I want something that is device and operating system >> independent. CD’s were good choices, and I only needed to migrate things >> forward. DVD’s are okay, but I believe they write data in a >> compressed/encrypted fashion. I shy away from external hard drives because >> the are less likely to work with future computers, and besides, they have so >> many moving parts and complicated electronics. Just more things to break. >> >> I’m leaning towards SD disks, but yikes, they are nothing but pure bits. >> Moreover, they are physically very small and easily lost. >> >> What do y’all suggest? >> >> † My iPhone is to blame. At more than 5 megapixels per image, the amount of >> disc space taken up by pictures is phenomenal. I suppose I could “weed” my >> images, but then much of the story would be lost, even if I printed. >> >> — >> Eric Morgan >
