Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Infrastructure guidance for video sharing app. - Page 2
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

Infrastructure guidance for video sharing app.

2»

Comments

  • NuntiusNuntius Member
    edited August 2017

    @Clouvider said:
    You keep shifting those numbers. First you talk about 150 for 1150 now you ask for 50. In the meantime you talk about expensive bandwidth with dedicated, which turns out to be 8 times cheaper. Make a decision.

    What one man show are you talking about ? I can see that since the your actual arguments have been demolished you're now trying to imply that all AWS competitors are some basement hosts ? Seriously ?

    I am actually, here's me sharing my knowledge to help someone out. Not everything is business.

    If you're really interested feel free to reach out to us and we'll be happy to quote.

    For example you are a one man show, at least when your statement at the companies house is correct, your balance also doesn't looks this healthy. So why I should trust to build a business with a one man show company like yours? When I can have AWS?

    Also I don't shifting any numbers - and why you take this all personal? I just ask how much 50TB storage with 50TB will coast on a dedicated server? I don't know where you see 150 in my posts?!

  • ClouviderClouvider Member, Patron Provider
    edited August 2017

    Check Companies House more carefully mate, you missed at least one person from the public record.

    No one's forcing you to, heck I haven't made a single offer in this thread - what's wrong with you ? Why you take it so personal? Of course you can be with AWS at proven whopping 800% premium, it's up to you.

    As I said, if you're interested, do reach out.

  • @Clouvider said:
    Check Companies House more carefully mate, you missed at least one person from the public record.

    No one's forcing you to, heck I haven't made a single offer in this thread - what's wrong with you ? Why you take it so personal? Of course you can be with AWS at proven whopping 800% premium, it's up to you.

    As I said, if you're interested, do reach out.

    Oh ok than a two man show. Sorry for that. It makes it much better.
    Yes and I am fine to pay more for a provider that will exist on long term than safe some bugs and be lost in the future. And now I am happy with AWS for my projects. But good luck for your business.

  • SplitIceSplitIce Member, Host Rep
    edited August 2017

    Wow that escalated quickly.

    I agree largely with @Clouvider. If your service is reasonably popular Bandwidth should trump storage costs. Perhaps look into both cold and hot storage down the line too. This can be as simple as servers with different storage densities (e.g cold storage could be 36TB of storage with 1Gbps of transfer, whereas hot storage <2TB of storage with 1Gbps+ etc depending on scale).

    One other piece of advice, scale out not up. It's far cheaper.

    Thanked by 1Clouvider
  • thekreekthekreek Member
    edited August 2017

    For starting it would be better if you go with a couple of dedicated servers, just use a mixed configuration.

    For example, if you make "SoYouStart" your only provider:

    Storage server:
    BK-8T (Intel Celeron J1900, 4GB DDR3, SoftRaid 2x4TB SATA) £30.56

    Transcoder server:
    E3-SAT-1-16 (Intel Xeon E3-1225v2, 16GB DDR3, SoftRaid 2x2TB SATA) £25.50

    Main server:
    E3-SSD-1-16 (Intel Xeon E3-1225v2, 16GB DDR3, SoftRaid 3x120GB SSD) £25.50

    You might maxout the network adapter of your storage server (I'm not sure if its 1gigabit or 100mb), but for the price you could have 2 storage servers and split the files on them.
    Their game server line would work better for transcoding but they are limited on storage, if you pick up the biggest SSD that would cost you £59.99.

    Search for multiple providers and try different configurations.

    Also are you sure you need all those resources from the very begining?
    You might be fine with just the main server and the transcoder server suggested at the beginning.

  • Another idea. Although you can use Amazon S3, there are several other S3 compatible storage providers - Delimiter is dirt cheap, throw BunnyCDN in front of it and you're off to the races.

    Thanked by 1Zerpy
  • @goldhat S3 is going to cost you a lung if you start using it for your bootstrap startup.

    Roll up your sleeves and get your own S3-compatible storage.

    I started playing with this and have a hetzner and an online summer special box running LeoFS

    Your bandwidth and cost storage will be a fraction to what you will be paying S3. With a budget of $200 you can squeeze probably another 2 hetzner auction servers for your S3 storage.

    $200 budget is not enough for S3 for a video sharing app. I think you need to add another zero to make it $2000 for a bootstrap video sharing app on S3.

  • RhysRhys Member, Host Rep

    ElliotJ said: Delimiter

    who?

  • @Rhys said:

    ElliotJ said: Delimiter

    who?

    delimiter.com

  • RhysRhys Member, Host Rep

    @IAlwaysBeCoding said:

    @Rhys said:

    ElliotJ said: Delimiter

    who?

    delimiter.com

    back to my original message, who?

    Thanked by 1imok
  • @Rhys said:

    @IAlwaysBeCoding said:

    @Rhys said:

    ElliotJ said: Delimiter

    who?

    delimiter.com

    back to my original message, who?

    Are you playing retarded?

  • @IAlwaysBeCoding said:

    @Rhys said:

    @IAlwaysBeCoding said:

    @Rhys said:

    ElliotJ said: Delimiter

    who?

    delimiter.com

    back to my original message, who?

    Are you playing retarded?

    who?

  • RhysRhys Member, Host Rep

    @Dextronox said:

    @IAlwaysBeCoding said:

    @Rhys said:

    @IAlwaysBeCoding said:

    @Rhys said:

    ElliotJ said: Delimiter

    who?

    delimiter.com

    back to my original message, who?

    Are you playing retarded?

    who?

    who?

  • @Dextronox said:

    @IAlwaysBeCoding said:

    @Rhys said:

    @IAlwaysBeCoding said:

    @Rhys said:

    ElliotJ said: Delimiter

    who?

    delimiter.com

    back to my original message, who?

    Are you playing retarded?

    who?

    John Doe

  • dwtbfdwtbf Member
    edited August 2017

    @goldhat said:
    Hi all,

    I am building an iOS app (and soon on Android and Web) that allows users to watch and share videos - it's different to YouTube in ways not relevant to my question.

    It's my first time building a product of my own that will (hopefully) scale - and I don't want to make mistakes in the start with regards to the infrastructure around it.

    Here's what I have in mind already - would love it if you guys could critique/make suggestions to it:

    Server 1:
    - Dedicated server, 6C, 32GB RAM
    This is where we will be hosting the PHP code and the MySQL Database

    Server 2:
    - Dedicated server, 8C, 32GB RAM
    This is where videos that are over 480p would be uploaded to to be transcoded to 480p before being sent to S3

    AWS S3
    Used for storage of all videos

    AWS Cloudfront
    CDN for delivery of video


    Here is the flow of a video that's uploaded by a user on the app:

    User > Transcoding Server > S3 > Cloudfront > Mobile App

    in the case the video is lower than 480p it would go straight to S3.


    What do you guys think? Any way I can optimise this further?

    You'll want wowza for streaming live, and if you want just saved streaming then skip S3. Use Backblaze, use a CDN like BunnyCDN, profit is better on that way. Further, skip MySQL, PHP - use node or python (@joepie91) as that'll speed up run time and ultimately it's just better. Use Node, Mongo and Angular or React for front end.

  • For CDN I can really recommend BunnyCDN
    On the other hand, with the latency that CDN.net shows I'd be sad even delivering content from there.

    @clouvider said:
    @PUSHRcdn for $200 you can barely get Cogent. OVH is hardly quality provider, especially in terms of their network.

    PUSHRcdn runs on cogent ... or fdcservers :-D you know, prem quality, worldwide.

  • @Nuntius said:
    True but why should he use a dedicated server? Also even with the bandwidth price I don't see a dedicated server a good choice for storage in his case. And even with 50TB traffic where you see 50TB storage with 50TB traffic for cheaper than 1600$?

    At OVH maybe?

  • PUSHR_VictorPUSHR_Victor Member, Host Rep

    @Zerpy said:
    For CDN I can really recommend BunnyCDN
    On the other hand, with the latency that CDN.net shows I'd be sad even delivering content from there.

    @clouvider said:
    @PUSHRcdn for $200 you can barely get Cogent. OVH is hardly quality provider, especially in terms of their network.

    PUSHRcdn runs on cogent ... or fdcservers :-D you know, prem quality, worldwide.

    We don't serve worldwide and we don't accelerate websites. We serve large bandwidth video and software services in EU and US and we do it well. We are no good for CSS, JS and other small objects. Anyway, I like Bunny CDN too and they offer a great solution. The rest is on the customers, that is what free trials are for.

  • doghouchdoghouch Member
    edited August 2017

    @PUSHRcdn said:

    @Zerpy said:
    For CDN I can really recommend BunnyCDN
    On the other hand, with the latency that CDN.net shows I'd be sad even delivering content from there.

    @clouvider said:
    @PUSHRcdn for $200 you can barely get Cogent. OVH is hardly quality provider, especially in terms of their network.

    PUSHRcdn runs on cogent ... or fdcservers :-D you know, prem quality, worldwide.

    We don't serve worldwide and we don't accelerate websites. We serve large bandwidth video and software services in EU and US and we do it well. We are no good for CSS, JS and other small objects. Anyway, I like Bunny CDN too and they offer a great solution. The rest is on the customers, that is what free trials are for.

    Test IP? Also, since you claim that you have a great video delivery network... when did you open shop?

    I've never heard of PUSHRcdn.

    Edit: Testing will need to wait, as the sidebar on your site is broken on mobile.

  • nicenice Member
    edited August 2017

    @PUSHRcdn said:
    I agree with others that your bill will be ugly with Amazon, but if your business model supports such costs it's a good decision. Apart from that there is nothing wrong with your idea (maybe I don't understand why the transcoder is only 6 cores, and the other server - 8 cores. Transcoding is very taxing). One thing that does not become clear about the 480p videos - Are you going to transcode them elsewhere, like on the user's device directly? If not, will the videos have their moov atom in the right place so they can be streamed without issues?
    Talking about bandwidth, regardless on what you decide, I strongly suggest you go unmetered. Anything else is a gamble and you may wake up one morning being too popular for your wallet (and if you've done your job right, you most probably will).

    Yeah video service will be costly in regards of infrastructure.
    He really wants lots of cores for the webserver to handle as many clients as possible at the same time, while for the transcoding server you should think about an higher clocked CPU versus lots of cores. (he was actually right in the first approach)

  • varunchopravarunchopra Member
    edited August 2017

    @Ympker said:
    You know that AWS Unlimited Storage is soon a thing of the past?

    ????

    ACD isn't S3.

    @OP: Check out https://www.jwplayer.com/ for video hosting if this works with your app.

  • PUSHR_VictorPUSHR_Victor Member, Host Rep

    @doghouch said:

    @PUSHRcdn said:

    @Zerpy said:
    For CDN I can really recommend BunnyCDN
    On the other hand, with the latency that CDN.net shows I'd be sad even delivering content from there.

    @clouvider said:
    @PUSHRcdn for $200 you can barely get Cogent. OVH is hardly quality provider, especially in terms of their network.

    PUSHRcdn runs on cogent ... or fdcservers :-D you know, prem quality, worldwide.

    We don't serve worldwide and we don't accelerate websites. We serve large bandwidth video and software services in EU and US and we do it well. We are no good for CSS, JS and other small objects. Anyway, I like Bunny CDN too and they offer a great solution. The rest is on the customers, that is what free trials are for.

    Test IP? Also, since you claim that you have a great video delivery network... when did you open shop?

    I've never heard of PUSHRcdn.

    Mobile is broken at present.

    We developed it in late 2014 to serve a file cloud for which the ad-revenue based business model did not allow a traditional CDN to be used due to price concerns. We went into beta in march this year with a few customers and opened for public last month.

    http://demo.pushrcdn.com/sintel_trailer-1080p.mp4
    http://demo.pushrcdn.com/1000Mb.dat
    96.9.224.3
    172.93.217.18

  • @PUSHRcdn What makes you different though? Apart from video delivery, there are other options available (MaxCDN, BunnyCDN, etc.).

  • PUSHR_VictorPUSHR_Victor Member, Host Rep

    @doghouch said:
    @PUSHRcdn What makes you different though? Apart from video delivery, there are other options available (MaxCDN, BunnyCDN, etc.).

    We cater to individuals and businesses that can't afford/don't want to pay for traffic (we are unmetered) and don't have huge budgets or are just starting up. These are usually websites, services and mobile apps that are very content heavy. One of our startup customers sustains ~6Gbps during weekend peak hours and their only other option to do this without breaking the bank would be to build their own CDN (or get VC funding). Apart from the cost effectiveness factor, we are constantly developing features that you may not find with other networks - speed limits on per IP basis, simultaneous connections limits, a file migration assistant. We now work on a CDN stacking feature which would allow customers that need presence in regions where we can not provide service to mix us up with another CDN or their own servers and still use us in EU&US while we redirect the rest of the traffic to the other services. Inbuilt video transcoding engine will be in the works from tomorrow for a new customer that we are now boarding, and will be directly integrated with their CDN storage.

  • @PUSHRcdn Would try it you expanded to more locations

  • PUSHR_VictorPUSHR_Victor Member, Host Rep

    @doghouch said:
    @PUSHRcdn Would try it you expanded to more locations

    We have a roadmap for this, but it is not possible for me to provide an ETA on what will happen when, as these are very dynamic times for us and we focus on doing things right rather than fast. Thanks for considering us and for the questions!

  • @PUSHRcdn hello, any good promo for us?

  • WSSWSS Member

    @PUSHRcdn said:
    these are very dynamic times for us and we focus on doing things right rather than fast.

    You couldn't have chosen a poorer choice of words, considering your product.

    Thanked by 1doghouch
  • @PUSHRcdn said:
    We don't serve worldwide and we don't accelerate websites. We serve large bandwidth video and software services in EU and US and we do it well. We are no good for CSS, JS and other small objects. Anyway, I like Bunny CDN too and they offer a great solution. The rest is on the customers, that is what free trials are for.

    Now, I happened to work for a huge video/software delivery CDN myself.

    I can tell you a secret - being on solely cogent links isn't great if you're trying to deliver video content with a decent speed/throughput towards a bunch of ISPs.

    I agree that the amount of pops doesn't have to be many, because having a few high capacity pops makes a lot more sense with working with a lot of data.

    However doing it on cogent-only... Naaaah

    Thanked by 1vimalware
  • PUSHR_VictorPUSHR_Victor Member, Host Rep

    Thanks for the feedback, @Zerpy !

Sign In or Register to comment.