Google Cloud Storage Nearline Reviews

I use Google Cloud Storage Nearline primarily as a storage solution for user data related to applications and websites. It serves as a container for saving and storing this data. 

Additionally, I utilize it for handling temporary files, particularly when working with Google Cloud Functions and Firebase Functions that have limitations with file sizes over 32 MB. In such cases, the data must first be downloaded to Google Cloud Storage before processing.

The most valuable aspect of Google Cloud Storage Nearline is its integration with the wider Google Cloud ecosystem. It works seamlessly with multiple Google Cloud services such as Cloud Functions, Cloud Run, and cloud operations like logging. This deep integration, facilitated by tools like Eventarc and built-in triggers, ensures a cohesive working environment. This value, despite sometimes higher costs compared to alternatives, justifies its use within a comprehensive suite of services.

One area that needs improvement is the documentation, which I find to be disorganized and not user-friendly. The lack of comprehensive walkthrough guides for specific use cases makes it difficult to follow. To enhance the experience, more detailed examples, guides, and tutorials from start to finish would be beneficial. Additionally, the cost compared to other providers like Amazon could be regarded as a downside.

I have been using Google Cloud Storage Nearline for at least four years.

In my experience, Google Cloud Storage Nearline is stable. I have not encountered significant issues with data stability or missing files, though there can be occasional latencies due to maintenance. The stability is generally high for typical use cases within projects lasting under a year.

I have not faced scalability issues with Google Cloud Storage Nearline. I have not encountered bucket capacity limits or similar challenges that would require advanced scalability techniques in my projects.

I have generally navigated issues independently, relying on forums, blogs, and other resources. I find that contacting Google support can be challenging, so I prefer finding workarounds for software issues myself.

Neutral

I previously used Amazon Web Services. The switch to Google Cloud Storage Nearline was primarily driven by the companies I worked for, which were already integrated into Google Cloud ecosystem. Despite potentially higher costs, the integration benefits with services like BigQuery and Firebase were compelling.

The initial setup is relatively straightforward for those familiar with cloud fundamentals like service accounts and IAM. It could take around eight to nine out of ten in ease of setup. However, for users without cloud experience, the setup could be complex due to the need for understanding service integration and permissions.

The deployment was managed by me, or, in similar scenarios, could be handled by any engineer familiar with the company's requirements and cloud services.

From a pricing standpoint, Google Cloud Storage Nearline is more expensive compared to some alternatives like Amazon. I would rate the pricing at five on a scale of one to ten.

Amazon was the alternative solution I had used before switching to Google Cloud Storage Nearline.

Overall, Google Cloud Storage Nearline is a solid solution within Google ecosystem, which is why I rate it seven out of ten. 

Enhancements in documentation and user guides, along with more competitive pricing, could elevate its standing.

Neutral

I work on infrastructure, mainly with computing and storage, networking, and security.

I am looking for solutions for infrastructure, networking, security, and virtual machines.

I find the flexibility in storing documents or data and the ease of retrieval valuable with this solution.

They should provide more options or flexibility in terms of pricing.

I have been working for the last year as a partner on the latest Google Cloud Storage Nearline version.

The SLA is 99.99% for storage. It is highly stable. Because there are services that have more SLAs, with two more SLAs that can be added, I would rate the stability of this solution an eight out of ten.

The solution is very flexible in terms of scalability. It is an online service, so we can scale it anytime with some pre-planning. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten.

As for the users using this solution in our organization, that varies according to what time of the day and what day it is, but it goes around 2,000 to 3,000 users. The maximum is about 3,000. On average, it stays somewhere between 2,000 and 1,800.

The initial setup is not very easy because we need prior technical knowledge, but it is also not very difficult. You can configure online services. I would rate the initial setup an eight out of ten.

The solution is deployed on the cloud in our organization.

The deployment takes around two to three days. In terms of hours, it would take 15 to 20 hours to set it up for an enterprise customer. It does not require more than one or two people for deployment.

It is highly expensive as compared to other similar services from other vendors. They need to work on reducing the cost of the service.

I would rate the pricing a nine out of ten, with one being cheap and ten being expensive.

We have similar options in AWS and Azure for on-premise. But with Google Storage, we can use it for other options like data analytics and AI, and all those options. It is tightly integrated with all those services. Customers choose Google Storage Nearline so they can use it for multiple purposes since we need different use cases depending upon customers' businesses. Looking forward to the future, they find Google Storage Nearline to be the best option.

I would tell anybody who wants to use this solution that this service has multiple features like integration with other advanced technological services like AI, machine learning, analytics, and advanced analytics, but at a higher cost compared to other services. So they have to consider the cost and the features it provides. If the two balance out or if it works for their pocket, they can go for it.

Overall, I would rate Google Cloud Storage Nearline an eight out of ten.

I utilize it for my cloud storage needs. It involves housing data in the cloud, particularly data that is rarely accessed, perhaps only a few times a month or even less frequently. It allows for efficient management of this type of data storage. This approach offers fixed costs and helps me optimize performance and achieve cost efficiency, especially when it comes to organizing and managing data clusters.

The ease and convenience that Google Cloud Storage Nearline provides is noticeable. It effectively addresses the issue of data accessibility, ensuring that whenever I require data, it's readily available without complications. There are occasions when data flow experiences fluctuations, with periods of increased data input. I need to stay responsive to these fluctuations, such as during spikes in data volume. Google Cloud Storage Nearline proves particularly advantageous in such scenarios, as it adapts seamlessly to accommodate spikes, ensuring that data accessibility remains smooth. It provides the necessary support and flexibility to manage data storage effectively, especially during times of variable data flow.

The suggestion for improvement primarily revolves around cost efficiency. Currently, Google Cloud Storage Nearline charges a minimum of thirty days for data access. I propose a more flexible approach. Instead of a fixed thirty-day minimum charge, there could be a programmatic adjustment based on data access patterns. For instance, if Google Cloud notices that certain data is no longer frequently accessed, they could automatically adjust the billing. When data isn't actively used, the charges for access to that data should decrease. This approach would ensure that users are billed fairly for the actual access they require, especially when data access patterns vary over time.

I have been using it for three years now.

It is a highly stable solution. I have never encountered any situations where I've noticed any glitches or experienced service breakdowns when using this service.

It's an exceptionally scalable product. In my work, I always strive to maintain a balance, especially when dealing with data storage. It seamlessly integrates into my projects, and its scalability plays a crucial role.

There was an occasion when I reached out to the support team, but it turned out that the issue I encountered wasn't related to the product. It was related to something else entirely within the cloud service.

I was previously using Amazon's Elastic Block Storage (EBS) for my storage needs. I noticed that Google Cloud Storage Nearline offers a more cost-effective solution. When comparing the costs of various Google Cloud services with those of AWS, I found that many of Google's services are more budget-friendly. The decision to switch to Google Cloud stemmed from a necessity to operate within a constrained budget while still maintaining efficiency.

The initial setup was quite straightforward and easy. It might be due to my familiarity with various storage platforms, as many cloud storage services tend to operate in a similar fashion.

I would recommend it because it is a service that offers specific advantages. When you opt for Google Cloud Storage Nearline, you're making a deliberate choice for long-term data storage. You're aware that the data you're storing there won't be accessed frequently. Unlike some other cloud storage platforms, it is more like an all-in-one solution. It is a reliable choice for managing your data storage needs within the broader context of cloud storage services. I would rate it seven out of ten.

Our primary use case of Google Cloud Storage Nearline is for storing unstructured data, like towers, files, and systems. We use it for both public and private cloud storage solutions.

The most valuable features of Google Cloud Storage Nearline are:

• The APIs, which are great. The solution has APIs for almost everything that we could possibly need for our file storage system.
• The SDKs are also well-supported with SDK documentation.
• The ease of reporting.
• The protection it provides us. It can isolate files and stop them from corrupting other files. There is a security mechanism that encrypts the files and all IPs when sharing with a third party. This ensures that no one will see the content of our files.
• Strong policies with respect to configuration and location. We can create buckets in each of our locations for storage. For example, if a file is generated in the US it should be stored in the US, and the same for files generated in Europe or Asia. 

As a lead developer, I struggled with the documentation for GCP. This could be improved by being made more clear.

Also, the interface for managing file storage in the buckets could be improved, together with improved search and filter options.

For the next release, I would like to see the solution behave more like a regular file-based system. Google Cloud Storage depends on OS, or it's supposed to be on Google Drive or another storage service. Google Storage files are sometimes very different. The solution should be expanded to be like a file-based system so that you can build a fast tool that stores files in Google Drive.

I have been using Google Cloud Storage Nearline for three years.

The solution is stable. I can only recall having one or two issues over the last three years.

We have seven daily users saving or pulling data, including three backend developers and three frontend developers. There are no limitations to the scalability of Google Cloud Storage Nearline.

The initial setup of Google Cloud Storage Nearline is easy to do. 

Google Cloud Storage Nearline is very inexpensive. It costs us less than $50 a month to store our files. We use approximately 10 terabytes. Overall, I would rate the product a five out of five for affordability. 

Overall, I would rate Google Cloud Storage Nearline an eight out of ten.

The most valuable feature of Nearline is the access. It's helpful to move data that is generated once a month, such as salary information, to Nearline. After that, you can move it to a cloud core line or archive. This feature is very helpful for once-a-month access.

The UI could be a little bit more effective. Now, the UI is just a white background, but it's really helpful if there are options to change the theme. I prefer that.  

I'm new to GCP and management. I've been learning how to build a bucket and set a storage class.

I've recently transitioned to a cloud engineer role, obtained my first certification as an associate cloud engineer, and recently passed the GCP Professional Cloud Architect exam. During that journey, I learned about cloud storage and how to create a GCP bucket.

I created a bucket using the Nearline storage class. Nearline is specifically for objects that are created and accessed once a month or less. Nearline storage is not regularly accessed, so it's primary focus is for once-a-month access. There is a condition that you should keep the object in the backend for at least one month.

You can set up a lifecycle policy to move objects from Nearline to another storage class.

It is stable. I haven't faced any issues with it.

It is scalable because we can add more objects to it. I don't know the exact amount of memory we can use, but it can be scaled.

It was easy to set up.

To deploy, I just created some virtual machines in GCP Cloud and Windows. I haven't included much more code in cloud storage.

But I'm deploying my code as a project repository, and I use Google Cloud Platform to fetch it. I'm using a Git repository for the maintenance of my code.

It is not difficult to maintain. It is automatically maintainable.

The pricing of the different storage classes is hard to compare. The higher the zone, the higher the price. The advantage is that you can access the data frequently, and the speed of the response is better when compared to the other storage classes, such as standard Google Cloud Storage. 

There are options like retention, where we can set how many days we want to keep our objects. We can also lock our objects. Nearline is good in this case, and it provides higher availability than both other cloud storage services. There are a lot of alternatives.

I tried AWS, but GCP is much simpler and easier to learn. I tried both, and I prefer GCP. The documentation is also better. It's easy to find the solution you want.

I would recommend using and exploring the solution. Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We have automation for extracting information and putting that information in files in buckets for other integrations with other apartments of my company we use this solution for storage and integration.

The capacity and space on offer are excellent.

It's easy to use. All services in the cloud are easy to use as you have a service account. You can manage the security very well, however, that is the same in all cloud network services.

The cloud setup is easy for experienced individuals.

The solution is stable and reliable. 

They need a better, more visual, user interface for folders and files. Right now, you can see a list of five. You need to see some details, more folders, and be able to drag and drop the folders. That would be useful.

Those new to GoogleCloud may struggle a bit with the setup.

I've used the solution for two or maybe even three years.

The stability is excellent.

I can't think of a better service that's provided in South America. The infrastructure overall is very stable and reliable. It's one of the top three clouds for sure.

The solution scales very, very well. There's as much space, as much capacity, as we need.

There are about 200 users right now. I work in a corporate technology center and we know a lot of IT people that work in storage, although not so much in the cloud. 

I'm also aware of Amazon and Microsoft and they all have the better infrastructure in terms of data centers in the world. They are all stable and all offer good uptime. 

The original setup is easy. I create buckets, however, I did not set up the first bucket in the company. That said, it's easy to use. In general, if you have knowledge about IT services or previously worked in a cloud, the implementation is not difficult. That said, if you are new in IT and new to the cloud, it is more difficult as you need to make relations in your mind between different services. It's best to have experienced people on it while you are setting it up.

I'm not sure about the licensing arrangement. We may pay yearly, however, we may also have negotiated pricing over more of a long term. We do plan to use the product for the long term.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

Nearline security could be better. The solution could integrate better with SEIM tools. We need to improve anything related to security, whether we're talking about IT, the technology platform on the Cloud, etc.

We've started using Google Nearline in 2018.

Nearline is highly stable.

I would rate Nearline nine out of 10. 

I have integrated Google Cloud Storage Nearline with BigQuery for analytics.

Encryption is the feature I have utilized with Google Cloud Storage Nearline.

I would assess the seamless retrieval speed on my infrequently accessed data using Nearline as a valuable feature.

There are no issues with the integration of Google Cloud Storage Nearline with other Google services.

Documentation is an area for improvement in Google Cloud Storage Nearline.

Documentation might cause some issues during deployment in future updates of Google Cloud Storage Nearline. Other than that, everything works flawlessly.

I have been using Google Cloud Storage Nearline for one year.

I would rate the technical support from Google at a 5 out of 10.

Google Cloud Storage Nearline is quite easy in terms of implementation.

My experience with the licensing and cost of Google Cloud Storage Nearline has been positive.

The solution offers quite good monitoring.

We didn't face any downtime last year using the solution. This was very helpful.

Google is always introducing new features and tends to have a new release every month.

The solution needs to offer better System Information and Event Management (SEIM). I'd like to discover how we could implement something like that within Google's cloud.

We are currently running the solution, but if I want to have a better security strategy, I know I have to do something else. It doesn't really offer that as part of the solution.

I've been using the solution for about a year and a half.

We use this solution for our client, and I'm not sure how many users they have. However, with the solution, you could potentially have anywhere from a couple hundred to a couple of thousand users on it. The client has apps on the app store and via the app, there's two types of users: patients and clinicians. There may be only a few hundred clinicians, but potentially thousands of patients. In that sense, I would say it's quite scalable.

I have nothing to complain about in terms of the technical support that is offered. So far, we are satisfied with the level of service.

We didn't previously use a different solution before choosing Google.

The initial setup was straightforward. We didn't face any complexities when we were originally setting it up and found it to be quite easy.

We're Google partners.

In terms of pricing, with Google, it depends on how much data a company uses. If they put more data inside the system, it will cost them more. If they have more traffic on the internet, that costs them more too. 

Everything is pay-per-use. There's the basic fee and then there's a pay-per-use fee. If more people are using the application, that means more data. If there's more data, it requires more storage, more CPU, more RAM use, etc., so the pricing is more expensive. 

Right now, for the number of servers and the storage that I have, I would say I'm charged between $125 and $150 per month.

In terms of using Google, we cannot go too far into the firewall and therefore are only using the basic Google cloud right now. 

We've done some contracts with AWS as well, and, compared to AWS, it's a different way of implementing the infrastructure to the services. Is it better? I'm not sure. It's just a matter of how much knowledge and comfort a user has with the solution. Right now, we'd rather go with Google. It's cheaper for the same quality of services.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.