lucene-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Open Relevance Infrastucture Request
Date Tue, 26 May 2009 15:20:52 GMT
The cost for storing a few hundred GB of data would be < $100/month.

The cost for transfer would be $17/100GB which could add up fairly quickly
if more than dozens of downloads happen.  My guess is that would be
unlikely.

Another option is to request Amazon host the dataset as a public dataset:

http://aws.amazon.com/publicdatasets/

On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 7:14 AM, Grant Ingersoll <gsingers@apache.org>wrote:

> You can cap the cost by limiting how much data you store right? You can use
>> RequesterPayBuckets
>> http://docs.amazonwebservices.com/AmazonS3/latest/index.html?RequesterPaysBuckets.html
to
>> move the cost onto the users who want the data. Per user, it would still be
>> fairly cheap. You get the added bonus of other S3 services, like being able
>> to send a device back and forth to import/export on site. You would just pay
>> for storage and transferring the data in - both cap-able by limiting the
>> amount of data you put in it.
>>
>>
> One of the goals is to make the data available for free, so I don't think
> this would work.  Currently, one can get the TREC data for a nominal fee as
> well.




-- 
Ted Dunning, CTO
DeepDyve

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message