That’s the point, what’s exactly being stored on those S3, that we need 25,000€ of them per year. I was not able to find enough public information which made me very concerned. That’s a quarter of the OWG budget and it’s completely private.
Are you really, really sure about DWG (Data Working Group) being involved at all?
Note that your understanding of situation may have other similar gaps.
+1
From 3 months ago, Operations/Minutes/2023-05-04 - OpenStreetMap Foundation, OWG talks about the AWS cost for GPX traces and user images being 400-500 USD. Why not zero? 3 months ago is surely is within the last 6 months range.
Key word “expected”, I am asking about today, actual, current cost. As seen above, I found conflicting information to your statement. I found a talk about potential AWS sponsorship but I couldn’t find any information about it being actually realized.
- A big part of the costs for the general account is the logging for the CDN and the planet backups.
Right now I understand that we pay €25000 yearly on storing primarily CDN logs and backups? Is that correct? This can’t be right.
Right now I understand that we pay €25000 yearly on storing primarily CDN logs and backups? Is that correct? This can’t be right.
From everything I’ve read in this threat so far you’re wrong. Can you step back, collect your thoughts and make a new post with your finding and/or questions in a couple of days? On github you edited one comment 8 times, it’s hard to follow. And as another user already wrote it reads like you’re in attack mode (knowingly or not), every other sentence reads like another assusation that other people hide something.
7 Likes
@NorthCrab Please let Firefishy get back from holiday and give you a full answer rather than keeping posting here about some links you might have found on the OSMF wiki.
For some more context, I edited this github comment (edits are publicly accessible) because I initially couldn’t find more information about the bi-weekly OWG meetings. After discovering this page: All pages with prefix - OpenStreetMap Foundation, I decided to retract my statement. This page is quite hidden on the OWG website: https://operations.osmfoundation.org.
We don’t yet use AWS for serving planet data, the ticket is still open for a reason 
And when we do it will be $0/month due to AWS sponsoring the cost under the AWS public data program. We have a dedicated AWS account setup with delegated billing to AWS already setup.
Maybe you are right, but it’s hard to remain calm when you find such conflicting statements.
- AWS has been free for 6 months now: Why does OSMF Budget €25,000 on Amazon - #4 by Firefishy
- Wait, actually it WILL be free: Operations/Minutes/2023-01-12 - OpenStreetMap Foundation, when we finish Move planet hosting to S3 · Issue #678 · openstreetmap/operations · GitHub first (quote: “Get planet tasks done and then ask for AWS sponsorship”)
Funny thing, I never asked whether it’s free or not. I accessed public information and found multiple concners with it, which I decided to bring up. I don’t know what the argument “hey buy it’s free now” really does here. It doesn’t answer anything.
Here is a screenshot from the AWS which actually shows 25,000€ spending estimate for 2023. The core issue I have, is why? Why so much? What do we store there? So far I only got this:
- Primarily CDN logs
- Primarily backups
- Secondary GPX traces
- Secondary profile pictures
Those should not be a 25,000€ yearly spending. That’s what I am most concerned about. This is not right. That’s what I want to bring attention to.
Please don’t change my wording. I said:
It’s quite obvious that I don’t have access to private information of others.
So, you have financial accounting and management accounting. In management accounting is just a way to allocate funds into different groups. To make an estimation of what might be spend. you want to make sure that your budget is always higher than what you might spend on that group. In this case you have a group where the spending is uncertain it is better to overestimate the spending (conservative accounting)
By estimating conservatively, you make sure you do not overspend, and when you make up the balance sheet (financial accounting) it looks a lot better to be able to write some money to the right side. Instead of having to cut into reserves.
1 Like
The core issue is that OWG don’t release the “full story” and that’s what concerns me the most.
That’s exactly what I mean. The topic wants to know more about OWG AWS costs which are private/hidden.
As per, Estimate cloud costs for 2023 · Issue #788 · openstreetmap/operations · GitHub, those are/were real spendings and the estimation for 2023 was quite on point. The difference between estimation and budget from the attached image, is quite negligable.
Wait until you see how much we spend with equinix (data centres), he.net (ISP) and on physical server hardware.
I don’t think you quite get the scale of the project.
I can breakdown our cloud usage / expenses / sponsorship once I back on Wednesday and have access to the real data.
5 Likes
Why do you deflect my questions? I don’t ask about other servers. I ask specifically about the AWS 25,000€ yearly spending. You have deflected my questions numerous times now which does not ease the situation.
Your comments are off-putting, let the person be on holiday and calm down. You’re also deflecting and ignoring the "I can breakdown our cloud usage / expenses / sponsorship once I back on Wednesday " reply you got.
11 Likes
I won’t be mad if I don’t get an answer for a week or so (I don’t expect I will get an answer today). I am just replying to new posts that come in. Should I stop replying then?