logoalt Hacker News

mbreeseyesterday at 5:14 PM2 repliesview on HN

It was better. When it first came out, it was a pretty simple API, at least simpler than alternatives (IIRC, I could just be thinking with nostalgia).

I think it's only gotten as complicated as it has as new features have been organically added. I'm sure there are good use cases for everything, but it does beg the question -- is a better API possible for object storage? What's the minimal API required? GET/POST/DELETE?


Replies

bostikyesterday at 6:33 PM

I suspect there is no decent "minimal" API. Once you get to tens of millions of objects in a given prefix, you need server side filtering logic. And to make it worse, you need multiple ways to do that.

For example, did you know that date filtering in S3 is based on string prefix matching against an ISO8601/RFC3339 style string representation? Want all objects created between 2024-01-01 and 2024-06-30? You'll need to construct six YYYY-MM prefixes (one per month) for datetime and add them as filter array elements.

As a result the service abbreviation is also incorrect these days. Originally the first S stood for "Simple". With all the additions they've had to bolt on, S2 would be far more appropriate a name.

everfrustratedyesterday at 5:32 PM

Like everything it starts off simple but slowly with every feature added over 19 years Simple Storage is it not.

S3 has 3 independent permissions mechanisms.