<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Glacier on The David Page</title><link>https://thedavidpage.pages.dev/tags/glacier/</link><description>Recent content in Glacier on The David Page</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2026 09:00:00 +0700</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://thedavidpage.pages.dev/tags/glacier/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Archiving Millions of Small Files to Glacier: When the 'Cheap Storage' Trick Backfires</title><link>https://thedavidpage.pages.dev/posts/cloud/aws/s3/glacier-small-files-cost-trap/</link><pubDate>Fri, 10 Jul 2026 09:00:00 +0700</pubDate><guid>https://thedavidpage.pages.dev/posts/cloud/aws/s3/glacier-small-files-cost-trap/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;S3 Glacier Deep Archive is famous for dirt-cheap long-term storage. Point a Lifecycle Rule at millions of tiny log files, though, and &amp;ldquo;cheap&amp;rdquo; can flip into &amp;ldquo;more expensive than doing nothing at all.&amp;rdquo;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Hi everyone 👋&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;I once confidently set up an S3 Lifecycle Rule: &lt;em&gt;&amp;ldquo;any object older than 30 days automatically transitions to Glacier Deep Archive.&amp;rdquo;&lt;/em&gt; Simple, standard cost-optimization advice. The catch: the bucket in question held millions of small log files, each only a few KB.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>