I have developed website which will allow user to upload 1-2 photos and also allow to see other users photo and rate them. For this I have planned to go for VPS. I am also thinking of another alternative of using image hosting service, where I will keep all user photos on image hosting server and embed links given by image server in my webpage.
Now my question is.
1) Using image hosting is faster(respone time for each user) than VPS?
2) How exactly using image hosting works. when user request web page from my server, will my server go and fetch entire image from image server and then send final result to user brower?
where I can host images for my site. It will be thousands of smaller image like 5k - 30k. I am looking at free sites like imageshak. They say in their terms of service that I can host images for my site as long as I don't host all my images. So do you think that I could put like 20 thousand images on their site? These images would not get accessed too much so it won't slam their servers or anything.
I have started a new image hosting website and currently i alloted 7 GB Disk Space and 30GB BW. I know it will not be enough after the site get famous. So which host i can go for to be in a safer side with my image hosting website?
For those host which are not overselling, they have obviously the space for file storage. But should they allow file storage on their shared hosting account, if they aren't overselling, and the files are legal?
Well, this can also be counted as a survey I need
It would be best if you provide a reason if your vote is no.
I own a social network generating over 50 million page views a month. Currently, I use only one massive server. I want to add in a new server just for image serving, as my current server is killing me with high bandwidth costs.
Server A runs the website and the logic Server B runs runs the images
What would be a good architecture between the two servers, given that they ARE NOT IN THE SAME hosting infrastructure (SoftLayer is not a great option if you want alot of bandwidth)
If a user changes his photo on Server A which runs the site, somehow Server B must be notified and gets a hold of the new image..... what would be the most technically feasible and optimum way to achieve this?
I'm looking for a good place to get a dedicated server from that allows IRC other than Staminus and has decent DDoS mitigation just to be safe. I would prefer total network bandwidth capacity to be no less than 10GB/s that pier with premium tier-1 bandwidth providers.
Needing: Processor: No less than a dual core RAM: 1-4 GB RAM HDD: No less than 150GB HDD IPs: 64 or 128 IP Addresses No less than 1500GB/m bandwidth on 100MB
I have a customer who needs to move her existing hosting to another provider. The one thing she likes about the existing provider, however, is an allowance of Email attachments of 50-75MB in size. Most limit you to 10-20MB. Does anyone know of a hosting provider that would accomodate this?
I have a dedicated that is oversized for the task (Q6600, 8gig RAM, Sata Raid-10 array), which is running a medium/small vBulletin site.
I have thought about providing free image hosting for the members, so I could have 100-300 people hosting sig images and other graphics on the server, which they in turn would link into forums and other places which could create quite a few requests for those graphics.
Is there anyway to quantify what type of load this static, image hosting would create?
The server currently is typically around .05 to .1 server load with nearly flatlined CPU's.
I used to use dedimove.com, but they have dropped off the face of the earth i moved to another host, id rather not say them name as i dont want to give them a bad name and have no complaints with their service other then the speeds are not very good...
im looking for a 100mbit port and under 100 dollars price range as the site really doesnt make any money... and at least 3 TB transfer...
i looking for the servers (powerfull and cheap) i take this post in vps forum 2 day's ago but i understand that it is better for me to take the post in dedicated forum my friend's : 1-vpn server(with many ip)-->with high transfer + good performance(for start)
2-server for starting image hosting (with high or unlimited transfer + 100mbps )+atleast 50_60gb h.d.d
I'm planning to launch an e-commerce website for photo and gift printing. I went on Google and found a few websites having Top 10 web hosting companies information. I am really confuse which one is the best for my website.
I'm not sure how many users and traffic the website will get and don't want to pay extra $$$s for VPS or dedicated servers
I was wondering if you guys would recommend a hosting company to use a VPS? I am a web designer and as a side job i am thinking of selling reseller accounts for very cheap prices. I am mainly concerned mainly because of the RAM most VPS have . I mean is 248 and 512 mb really ok? Also , anyone have an insight on "burst ram"? What does this mean?
I will be starting up a new hosting company that will offer free and paid hosting. My question is, should I start out with a reseller, and move on as needed? I was simply thinking of starting out with a VPS, so I could simply skip the reseller part. I read elsewhere that some simply get a reseller and get another reseller when they need it.
What path should I choose. I could always get a VPS later on, but why not get one now? This is one reason I ask, because since reading about the reseller post, I am now split on this.
To note, have used a reseller before, but not a VPS. I do want to eventually learn to run a VPS, so this could be the time to do so.
we have about 10 servers in iweb.ca , iweb is good but account managers support are very poor ! for example when I need to upgrade my server I should contact my account manager and my account manager answer to my email after 2 weeks ! (if he answer)so I want to transfer my servers to another company ,
I've read articles that said it's generally bad to use the domain registrar as the hosting company(forgot the reason though)Right now I have some domains in Goddady and 1and1, and have a Hostgator account. I am thinking about just using Goddady's hosting service so I only need to manage my Goddady and 1and1 accounts instead of managing 3 accounts.
I am going to use Wordpress.org to build the sites
I have recently built my first database application.I used SQL Server 2005 Express edition because it is free. The drawback is that it can only hold 4GB of data. But the database is also compatible with any SQL Server edition.
I'm wondering what my options are - a lot of hosting companies seem to offer a greater storage capacity and then limit the actual size of the SQl database. i.e. 10GB of online diskspace with a 600MB SQL database.
I am in the process of creating a site for my family, which is spread out around the world. I am using Joomla and have built my site on Siteground as my host.
My site will have low traffic, for family only, but I want my family to be able to post pictures, chat and blog.
I am very happy with Siteground but it has come to my attention that even though they offer 750gb of space I can only have up to 5gb of picture files (gif, jpg, etc.) I feel that I will eventually exceed this and being new at the whole site creation, I do not want to risk data being lost (database, files, etc.) when the time comes to transfer to a new host.
The site is not active yet as I am still working out the kinks and adding more pages. I figure if I am going to make a move to another host now would be the best time.
So I guess the question I have is what hosts, in your opinions, would be the best for the site I explained and still be able to work in Joomla.