Cloudflare Developers•3y ago

Oh, er let me look for it

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:06 PM

Well it doesn't look professional

kian•7/3/23, 8:06 PM

It'll be https://github.com/cloudflare/workers-sdk/pull/2573

kian•7/3/23, 8:06 PM

Haha

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:09 PM

From Cloudflare R2 documentation "You will not share presigned URLs directly with end users or browsers, as presigned URLs are used more for internal applications.". So i guess what they mean by this is that they expect people to use a proxy server where the proxy server download the file from R2 and then provide it to the end user ?

Phatso•7/3/23, 8:09 PM

Maybe you could use a worker triggered by a cleaner url/path to do the data transfer?

Phatso•7/3/23, 8:09 PM

data.mydomain.com/file?id=blah
something along those lines perhaps

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:09 PM

i don't want to pay massive bill for request and bandwidth by using workers

kian•7/3/23, 8:10 PM

The issue is the full URL query params - which has the 'signed' part

Unsmart•7/3/23, 8:10 PM

bandwidth is free fwiw

Phatso•7/3/23, 8:10 PM

I think you'd be really surprised at how affordable it is, but cost is still a consideration

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:11 PM

But the amount of time running the worker function is not? so if a worker function need to run 1mn to run to download a file to a user. That will be pricey

Phatso•7/3/23, 8:11 PM

I think I'm only paying $5 for this still

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:11 PM

or i'm missing something.

Phatso•7/3/23, 8:12 PM

I mean you could probably just have the worker generate or find the URL and return a 302 instead

Phatso•7/3/23, 8:12 PM

(I'm not 100% familiar with how the signed links work so I'm just spitballing)

Kkraftriver But the amount of time running the worker function is not? so if a worker functi...

Unsmart•7/3/23, 8:12 PM

Bundled workers are $0.50/million requests after the first 10 million included in the $5/mo workers plan. There is no duration charges.

Unbound charges for duration but would honestly probably be super fast anyways if all you do is proxy so

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:13 PM

400,000 GB-s, + $12.50/million GB-s

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:13 PM

Unsmart•7/3/23, 8:13 PM

Its like pennies per ms

Unsmart•7/3/23, 8:13 PM

not even pennies

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:13 PM

I wanted to put the crying smiley haha

Unsmart•7/3/23, 8:13 PM

fractions of a penny

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:13 PM

Not when you have million of images to load every day

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:14 PM

not pennies

Unsmart•7/3/23, 8:14 PM

$0.0000000016 per millisecond and a signed url proxy would take like a few ms at most. Would be cheaper than bundled at a per request level but bundled includes more free requests

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:15 PM

i think we're not talking about the same thing here

UUnsmart $0.0000000016 per millisecond and a signed url proxy would take like a few ms at...

Phatso•7/3/23, 8:15 PM

yeah just to be clear, do you mean having the worker proxy the actual data, or just redirect with the presigned url

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:15 PM

what i want is proxy the presigned url from cloudflare so people don't see the cloudflare domain but my domain like this storage.mydomain.com/token

Phatso•7/3/23, 8:16 PM

when you say "see", is this in a web browser ?

PPhatso yeah just to be clear, do you mean having the worker proxy the actual data, or j...

Unsmart•7/3/23, 8:16 PM

You wouldnt need to redirect workers doesnt bill for the time it takes to transfer it stops once you start sending back data

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:16 PM

by using a worker function with my subdomain it would work but then the function will run for as long as the download will be running

PPhatso when you say "see", is this in a web browser ?

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:16 PM

yes in the browser

Phatso•7/3/23, 8:16 PM

i think unsmart is saying that the cost for that download duration would be negligible, even at the scales you were talking about

Phatso•7/3/23, 8:17 PM

don't want to speak for them though, i think we weren't all on the same page

Unsmart•7/3/23, 8:17 PM

You could also just use bundled workers which dont have any charge for duration if you are scared of duration billing

Phatso•7/3/23, 8:17 PM

that could be a good option too

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:17 PM

i don't think it would be negligable at all. So let's take 10 million image a day at 1MB through a worker function

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:18 PM

well, bundled do have a 50ms cost duration as well

Phatso•7/3/23, 8:18 PM

true

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:18 PM

so if the time to download is like 500ms it would be 10 cycle

Phatso•7/3/23, 8:19 PM

but the gb/s would still be high for 10M images a day at 1mb a piece

Phatso•7/3/23, 8:19 PM

right?

Kkraftriver so if the time to download is like 500ms it would be 10 cycle

Unsmart•7/3/23, 8:19 PM

a fetch request takes 0ms

Phatso•7/3/23, 8:20 PM

it might be useful to do a quick napkin-math calculation for his specific example

Unsmart•7/3/23, 8:20 PM

wall time and cpu time are very different

kraftriver•7/3/23, 8:21 PM

In bundled it would cost 50$ per 10M images which download over 500ms in average. If my calculation are correct

Phatso•7/3/23, 8:21 PM

just to be sure here james, they said that as soon as your worker starts responding to the request, the timer stops

Phatso•7/3/23, 8:21 PM

so the time for the file to actually get to the client is not included in that duration cost

Oh, er let me look for it

Similar Threads