
It is less expensive than the most expensive S3-compatible options. When we were searching for S3-compatible alternatives, we were looking for a few things:
- Substantially lower cost per GB per month than S3
- Simpler fee structure for requests
- No egress bandwidth charges
We were drawn to Wasabi because they seemed reputable and had a very straight-forward fee structure. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
The things I dislike the most:
- Unreliable object access - in practice, we've found that object availability hovers very close to 99.90% - so at any given time, one out of every 1000 objects in our buckets with millions of objects cannot be fetched. There doesn't appear to be a rhyme or reason to this, and this availability affects plenty of very recently-added and accessed objects.
- You are charged for deleted objects for at least 30 days.
At our peak, we kept >12 million objects in Wasabi, using over 120TB. In typical use, Wasabi objects are barely available 99.9%. We've seen objects remain unavailable for 30+ minutes at a time when they're in that 0.1%. However, they had an extended outage on January 24 in their us-east-1 region that prevented us from using ANY of our production buckets for 4+ hours. We could neither read nor write from those buckets during that time, which would put total availability below 99.9% for the entire first half of the year.
We paid for premium support last summer. During this incident, support was minimally responsive, and definitely not proactive (we had to ask about the issue to learn about it). I've asked about billing credits and received no answer for more than 3 business days despite being a premium customer.
Lastly, we're in the process of migrating to a more stable S3 alternative, and due to Wasabi's minimum 30 day charge (which would be 90 days if we weren't a "premium" customer!), we'll be paying for deleted storage for a full month now. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.