6 ms·

Then there's the AWS massive disadvantage in data traffic cost. Small VPS providers (or large ones for that matter) typically include 4-5 Tb of data, and their

by waps 13y ago

Then there's the AWS massive disadvantage in data traffic cost. Small VPS providers (or large ones for that matter) typically include 4-5 Tb of data, and their compute is no more expensive (or cheaper) than amazon. And half the customers want large pngs (because jpg at 2% "reduces quality"). I'd say only to people with 45" monitors at 5cm to their screen or less. It also produces 50% data savings. That's the biggest mistake one can make : host a traffic intensive app (even lots of graphics) on AWS.

ballard 13y ago
Hurricane Electric transit FTW.
reitzensteinm 13y ago
If anyone is in that situation and remotely budget conscious, you can do this trivially: 1) Order a server with lots of bandwidth from a provider such as Hetzner, 100tb or Leaseweb (or possibly OVH, though I haven't used them personally). Low performance hardware is fine, though you'll either want enough ram to fit your frequently used images, or an SSD. 2) Install nginx as a reverse caching proxy. There's an example configuration in the nginx docs. Requests to /blah/something.png on your nginx server are sourced from www.yoursite.com/blah/something.png, but cached for the period you specify. 3) In your DNS, set static1.yoursite.com, static2 etc to point to the newly created server. This is for browser parallel downloads. 4) In your html, point your static assets randomly amongst the newly created domains (best if this is done automatically). In this way, your newly created box soaks up the load of the static assets traffic, but it has no additional cognitive overhead. You don't change your development model at all. If you have a switch in your code to source the images from the original domain, you can go back to hitting AWS instantly should the box have problems, so the risk is very low. You can get a 10 gigabit unmetered server from the Leaseweb volume network for 600 euros/mo. The bandwidth is lower quality than AWS, but if you have high utilization you can pump more than a petabyte from the server a month, which would cost approximately $60k from EC2.
- rkrzr 13y ago
  Or simply use a CDN like e.g. CloudFlare.
  - reitzensteinm 13y ago
    Sure... the above is how to get a ton of bandwidth on the cheap. CloudFlare (and other CDNs) aren't the way to do this, as described below: http://phoboslab.org/log/2013/02/how-much-traffic-is-too-much-traffic-for-cloudflare http://phoboslab.org/log/2013/02/how-much-traffic-is-too-muc... >> At 100TB/mo., pure file delivery, you'd need to be an Enterprise customer. Let me know if this works within your budget. > The Enterprise plan comes at $3000/mo.

by waps 13y ago

ballard 13y ago

Hurricane Electric transit FTW.

reitzensteinm 13y ago

If anyone is in that situation and remotely budget conscious, you can do this trivially: 1) Order a server with lots of bandwidth from a provider such as Hetzner, 100tb or Leaseweb (or possibly OVH, though I haven't used them personally). Low performance hardware is fine, though you'll either want enough ram to fit your frequently used images, or an SSD. 2) Install nginx as a reverse caching proxy. There's an example configuration in the nginx docs. Requests to /blah/something.png on your nginx server are sourced from www.yoursite.com/blah/something.png, but cached for the period you specify. 3) In your DNS, set static1.yoursite.com, static2 etc to point to the newly created server. This is for browser parallel downloads. 4) In your html, point your static assets randomly amongst the newly created domains (best if this is done automatically). In this way, your newly created box soaks up the load of the static assets traffic, but it has no additional cognitive overhead. You don't change your development model at all. If you have a switch in your code to source the images from the original domain, you can go back to hitting AWS instantly should the box have problems, so the risk is very low. You can get a 10 gigabit unmetered server from the Leaseweb volume network for 600 euros/mo. The bandwidth is lower quality than AWS, but if you have high utilization you can pump more than a petabyte from the server a month, which would cost approximately $60k from EC2.

rkrzr 13y ago
Or simply use a CDN like e.g. CloudFlare.
- reitzensteinm 13y ago
  Sure... the above is how to get a ton of bandwidth on the cheap. CloudFlare (and other CDNs) aren't the way to do this, as described below: http://phoboslab.org/log/2013/02/how-much-traffic-is-too-much-traffic-for-cloudflare http://phoboslab.org/log/2013/02/how-much-traffic-is-too-muc... >> At 100TB/mo., pure file delivery, you'd need to be an Enterprise customer. Let me know if this works within your budget. > The Enterprise plan comes at $3000/mo.