I am using s3 bucket to store my data. And I keep pushing data to this bucket every single day. I wonder whether there is feature I can compare the files different in my bucket between two date. I not, is there a way for me to build one via aws cli or sdk?
The reason I want to check this is that I have a s3 bucket and my clients keep pushing data to this bucket. I want to have a look how much data they pushed since the last time I load them. Is there a pattern in aws support this query? Or do I have to create any rules in s3 bucket to analyse it?
Listing from Amazon S3
You can activate Amazon S3 Inventory, which can provide a daily file listing the contents of an Amazon S3 bucket. You could then compare differences between two inventory files.
List it yourself and store it
Alternatively, you could list the contents of a bucket and look for objects dated since the last listing. However, if objects are deleted, you will only know this if you keep a list of objects that were previously in the bucket. It's probably easier to use S3 inventory.
Process it in real-time
Instead of thinking about files in batches, you could configure Amazon S3 Events to trigger something whenever a new file is uploaded to the Amazon S3 bucket. The event can:
Trigger a notification via Amazon Simple Notification Service (SNS), such as an email
Invoke an AWS Lambda function to run some code you provide. For example, the code could process the file and send it somewhere.
Related
We are using grafana's cloudwatch data source for aws metrics. We would like to differentiate folders in S3 bucket with respect to their sizes and show them as graphs. We know that cloudwatch doesn't give object level metrics but bucket level. In order to monitor the size of the folders in the bucket, let us know if any possible solution out there.
Any suggestion on the same is appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
Amazon CloudWatch provides daily storage metrics for Amazon S3 buckets but, as you mention, these metrics are for the whole bucket, rather than folder-level.
Amazon S3 Inventory can provide a daily CSV file listing all objects. You could load this information into a database or use Amazon Athena to query the contents.
If you require storage metrics at a higher resolution than daily, then you would need to track this information yourself. This could be done with:
An Amazon S3 Event that triggers an AWS Lambda function whenever an object is created or deleted
An AWS Lambda function that receives this information and updates a database
Your application could then retrieve the storage metrics from the database
Thanks for the reply John,
However I found a solution for it using an s3_exporter. It gives metrics according to size of the folders & sub-folders inside S3 bucket.
I'm trying to sync a large number of files from one bucket to another, some of the files are up to 2GB in size after using the aws cli's s3 sync command like so
aws s3 sync s3://bucket/folder/folder s3://destination-bucket/folder/folder
and verifying the files that had been transferred it became clear that the large files had lost the metadata that was present on the original file in the original bucket.
This is a "known" issue with larger files where s3 switches to multipart upload to handled the transfer.
This multipart handeling can be configured via the .aws/config file which has been done like so
[default]
s3 =
multipart_threshold = 4500MB
However when again testing the transfer the metadata on the larger files is still not present, it is present on any of the smaller files so it's clear that I'm heating the multipart upload issue.
Given this is an s3 to s3 transfer is the local s3 configuration taken into consideration at all?
As an alternative to this is there a way to just sync the metadata now that all the files have been transferred?
Have also tried doing aws s3 cp with no luck either.
You could use Cross/Same-Region Replication to copy the objects to another Amazon S3 bucket.
However, only newly added objects will copy between the buckets. You can, however, trigger the copy by copying the objects onto themselves. I'd recommend you test this on a separate bucket first, to make sure you don't accidentally lose any of the metadata.
The method suggested seems rather complex: Trigger cross-region replication of pre-existing objects using Amazon S3 inventory, Amazon EMR, and Amazon Athena | AWS Big Data Blog
The final option would be to write your own code to copy the objects, and copy the metadata at the same time.
Or, you could write a script that compares the two buckets to see which objects did not get their correct metadata, and have it just update the metadata on the target object. This actually involves copying the object to itself, while specifying the metadata. This is probably easier than copying ALL objects yourself, since it only needs to 'fix' the ones that didn't get their metadata.
Finally managed to implement a solution for this and took the oportunity to play around with the Serverless framework and Step Functions.
The general flow I went with was:
Step Function triggered using a Cloudwatch Event Rule targetting S3 Events of the type 'CompleteMultipartUpload', as the metadata is only ever missing on S3 objects that had to be transfered using a multipart process
The initial Task on the Step Function checks if all the required MetaData is present on the object that raised the event.
If it is present then the Step Function is finished
If it is not present then the second lambda task is fired which copies all metadata from the source object to the destination object.
This could be achieved without Step Functions however was a good simple exercise to give them a go. The first 'Check Meta' task is actually redundant as the metadata is never present if multipart transfer is used, I was originally also triggering off of PutObject and CopyObject as well which is why I had the Check Meta task.
We have a ton of S3 buckets and are in the process of cleaning things up. We identified Glacier as a good way to archive their data. The plan is to store the content of those buckets and then remove them.
It would be a one-shot operation, we don't need something automated.
I know that:
a bucket name may not be available anymore if one day we want to restore it
there's an indexing overhead of about 40kb per file which makes it a not so cost-efficient solution for small files and better to use an Infrequent access storage class or to zip the content
I gave it a try and created a vault. But I couldn't run the aws glacier command. I get some SSL error which is apparently related to a Python library, wether I run it on my Mac or from some dedicated container.
Also, it seems that it's a pain to use the Glacier API directly (and to keep the right file information), and that it's simpler to use it via a dedicated bucket.
What about that? Is there something to do what I want in AWS? Or any advice to do it in a not too fastidious way? What tool would you recommend?
Whoa, so many questions!
There are two ways to use Amazon Glacier:
Create a Lifecycle Policy on an Amazon S3 bucket to archive data to Glacier. The objects will still appear to be in S3, including their security, size, metadata, etc. However, their contents are stored in Glacier. Data stored in Glacier via this method must be restored back to S3 to access the contents.
Send data directly to Amazon Glacier via the AWS API. Data sent this way must be restored via the API.
Amazon Glacier charges for storage volumes, plus per request. It is less-efficient to store many, small files in Glacier. Instead, it is recommended to create archives (eg zip files) that make fewer, larger files. This can make it harder to retrieve specific files.
If you are going to use Glacier directly, it is much easier to use a utility, such as Cloudberry Backup, however these utilities are designed to backup from a computer to Glacier. They probably won't backup S3 to Glacier.
If data is already in Amazon S3, the simplest option is to create a lifecycle policy. You can then use the S3 management console and standard S3 tools to access and restore the data.
Using a S3 archiving bucket did the job.
Here is how I proceeded:
First, I created a S3 bucket called mycompany-archive, with a lifecycle rule that turns the Storage class into Glacier 1 day after the file creation.
Then, (with the aws tool installed on my Mac) I ran the following aws command to obtain the buckets list: aws s3 ls
I then pasted the output into an editor that can do regexp relacements, and I did the following one:
Replace ^\S*\s\S*\s(.*)$ by aws s3 cp --recursive s3://$1 s3://mycompany-archive/$1 && \
It gave me a big command, from which I removed the trailing && \ at the end, and the lines corresponding the buckets I didn't want to copy (mainly mycompany-archive had to be removed from there), and I had what I needed to do the transfers.
That command could be executed directly, but I prefer to run such commands using the screen util, to make sure the process wouldn't stop if I close my session by accident.
To launch it, I ran screen, launched the command, and then pressed CTRL+A then D to detach it. I can then come back to it by running screen -r.
Finally, under MacOS, I ran cafeinate to make sure the computer wouldn't sleep before it's over. To run it, issued ps|grep aws to locate the process id of the command. And then caffeinate -w 31299 (the process id) to ensure my Mac wouldn't allow sleep before the process is done.
It did the job (well, it's still running), I have now a bucket containing a folder for each archived bucket. Next step will be to remove the undesired S3 buckets.
Of course this way of doing could be improved in many ways, mainly by turning everything into a fault-tolerant replayable script. In this case, I have to be pragmatic and thinking about how to improve it would take far more time for almost no gain.
I have the following requirement. I'm however unsure of how to go about it
Bucket 1 contains data.
Bucket 2 should have duplicate data of Bucket 1. Whenever any file is changed in bucket 1, it is also be changed in bucket 2.
Data in bucket 2 can be independently changed. However, this data change should not be reflected in bucket 1.
This entire process must be automated and run in real time.
Depending on your needs, you might find Cross Region Replication works for you. This would require the buckets to be in separate regions. It also wouldn't copy items that were replicated from another bucket.
Essentially you just create two buckets in separate regions, create an IAM role allowing the replication, then create a Replication Configuration.
If you already have data in the source bucket that you want to appear in the target bucket, then you will also need to run a sync (you can do this as a one-off via the cli).
Another option is using AWS Lambda, which allows the buckets to be in the same region, and gives you more control should you need it. You can also replicate to multiple buckets if you want to.
I'm setting up my client with a system that allows users to upload a video or two. These videos will be stored on Amazon S3, which I've not used before. I'm unsure about buckets, and what they represent. Do you think I would have a single bucket for my application, a bucket per user or a bucket per file?
If I were to just have the one bucket, presumably I'd have to have really long, illogical file names to prevent a file name clash.
There is no limit to the amount of objects you can store in a bucket, so generally you would have a single bucket per application, or even across multiple applications. Bucket names have to be globally unique across S3 so it would certainly be impossible to manage a bucket per object. A bucket per user would also be difficult if you had more than a handful of users.
For more background on buckets you can try reading Working with Amazon S3 Buckets
Your application should generate unique keys for objects you are adding to the bucket. Try and avoid numeric ascending ids, as these are considered inefficient. Simply reversing a numeric id can usually make an effective object key. See Amazon S3 Performance Tips & Tricks for a more detailed explanation.