This is one potential way to reduce load, and already in use in AWS. It's not immediately clear if the AWS architecture can translate seamlessly to scl3. IT has VMs available if needed.
This would reduce cost from S3 -> SCL3 as well.
Old bug, still relevant? I believe the product delivery migration project addresses the zlb loading, for which this bug was originally filed. (In reply to Chris AtLee [:catlee] from comment #1) > This would reduce cost from S3 -> SCL3 as well. Given current plans, what's the expected "tee shirt size" of the savings? If less than "medium" do we want to bother leaving open?
We're already using an ftp proxy in SCL3 for S3 resources at least, where most of our artifacts are coming from. RESO FIXED / WFM?
Status: NEW → UNCONFIRMED
Ever confirmed: false
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Last Resolved: 3 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.