Are there any entry-level content caching services?

Post #311,981 by drook 7/29/09 5:42:52 PM Reply	Are there any entry-level content caching services? My blog is on Blogger.com. But I serve the images off my site. Over the last couple of days, I've had really good traffic numbers ... so good that I hit 96% of my bandwidth cap for the day. Oops, that's cutting it a little close. My current host only offers 25% more bandwidth than I've currently got, even in their top-end package. Is there an entry-level version of something like Akamai, where I can serve up a bunch of static content? Better responsiveness for readers would be a bonus, but at this point I'm just interested in cheap bandwidth for serving images. Current cap is 68266.67 MB per day. -- Drew
Post #311,984 by folkert 7/29/09 7:31:06 PM 7/29/09 7:32:24 PM Reply	AMAZON Cloudfront and S3 For what we do... maximum $10/month and its distributed. We do far less that this guesstimate. but the speedup is phenomenal. http://calculator.s3...ws.com/calc5.html You need AMAZON S3 and AMAZON CloudFront. Amazon S3 (US) Storage: 5 GB-months Data Transfer-in: 5 GB Data Transfer-out: 100 GB PUT/LIST Requests: 1500 Requests Other Requests: 200000 Requests Amazon CloudFront Data Transfer-out - US: 92.3 GB Requests - US: 193000 Requests Data Transfer-out - Europe: 7.6 GB Requests - Europe: 4000 Requests Data Transfer-out - Japan: 2.6 GB Requests - Japan: 2000 Requests Data Transfer-out - Hong Kong: 1.3 GB Requests - Hong Kong: 1000 Requests Total Cost $36.12 Of course these are WILD guesstimates. Figure your split for CloudFront based on what you see now. Remember the Data-Transfer-in is only when putting stuff there. Pless then... its an awesome thing and you can CNAME the calculated host and also make an HTTPS compatible name for it too... so people can browse your site with https should you ever want to support it. Another thing AMAZON CloudFront is HUGELY FAST! HUGELY FAST! Edited by folkert July 29, 2009, 07:32:24 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #311,986 by drook 7/29/09 7:50:04 PM Reply	Are those numbers per month? If you look at mine again, it's 68 GB per day. (Officially 2,000 GB per month, so the daily cap is marginally lower in July than June.) That's not a typo. I had 33,670 page views yesterday. A typical blog post might have anywhere from 15-30 images, say 60 KB each, so about 1-2 MB, not counting headers, thumbnails and other design elements. The main page has 3 posts. I got lucky yesterday that I noticed the traffic early and did a "welcome" post with no images, which pushed a regular post off the front page. If I hadn't done that, I probably would have exceeded my cap and been off the air by early afternoon. -- Drew
Post #311,988 by folkert 7/29/09 8:03:24 PM Reply	Yikes... Misread. right about $682/month for your numbers off a Distributed Content Delivery Network 1043770 hits (cheap part) 2000GB/month (expensive part) You are starting to get into the expensive areas now.
Post #311,989 by drook 7/29/09 8:10:29 PM Reply	That's what I figured And it's an oddly large bump. It seems the shared hosting deals set bandwidth caps that they believe are beyond what most users will ever need. (CPU time is the exact opposite.) To scale up, you need to move to a whole different class of host. -- Drew
Post #312,074 by scoenye 7/30/09 8:20:43 PM Reply	Your images may be a lot larger than that I only looked at one arbitrary post (http://blog.cooklike...h-onion-soup.html). The thumbnails are ~60K, the images themselves are ~600K
Post #312,076 by drook 7/30/09 8:28:31 PM Reply	Most people don't click through to most of the pictures Although you're right, a few people doing that can really eat up bandwidth. -- Drew
Post #312,077 by Steve Lowe 7/30/09 8:32:06 PM Reply	Server-side compression? You're probably already doing this, but you might explore it further: http://www.webrefere...http/compression/
Post #312,078 by drook 7/30/09 8:40:06 PM Reply	The HTML is coming from blogger.com It's only the static images coming from my site. You know what's funny? The #1 URL by traffic volume is http://cooklikeyourg...r.com/favicon.ico And it's 510b. -- Drew
Post #312,084 by folkert 7/30/09 10:32:14 PM Reply	Re: The HTML is coming from blogger.com I just edited you favicon.ico... Dropped from 510b to 252b. Layer 1, 4bpp, 1 bit alpha, 16 slot palette compressed Layer 2, 1bpp, 1 bit alpha, 2 lot palette compressed You might want to go through you pics/images
Post #312,089 by drook 7/30/09 11:13:07 PM Reply	Yeah, I don't know much about compressing photos -- Drew
Post #312,092 by folkert 7/31/09 6:30:48 AM Reply	Better learn and quickly... Lessen your quality on jpeg... or Reduce you colors count... In the following link (two pics 99K and 66K), I only reduced the quality of the JPEG. You might say its a bit darker, but you can up the brightness a bit. http://www.gregfolkert.net/pics/drook/ Saving at least 1/3rd in image size... with just a weee little bit of processing. Might just be worth that $700/month.
Post #311,985 by static 7/29/09 7:36:29 PM Reply	Who have you looked at? I know Akamai is expensive, but the only comparison I have is compared to hosting the content yourself. Putting "content delivery network" into Google pulls up a few other companies; EdgeCast, Limelight networks, Velocix, apparantly even Amazon do it, too. I also found http://www.web-caching.com/cdns.html which is a list of CDN companies. Wade. Q:Is it proper to eat cheeseburgers with your fingers? A:No, the fingers should be eaten separately.
Post #311,987 by drook 7/29/09 7:52:31 PM Reply	I found that same list And of the dozen I looked at, most specialize in streaming media. Of the ones that do "small file" serving (<1MB), none of them list prices, just forms to request a call from a salesman. And you know what that means. -- Drew
Post #311,990 by static 7/29/09 9:11:33 PM Reply	Aye. That was the only way a previous employer of mine got prices off Akamai. :-/ Maybe the solution is to look at different types of hosting...? I've no idea what. The few times I've gone looking, I've not had to serve 68Gb a day. :-) Wade. Q:Is it proper to eat cheeseburgers with your fingers? A:No, the fingers should be eaten separately.
Post #311,991 by drook 7/29/09 9:50:24 PM Reply	And it's NOT PORN Well ... food porn, but that's different. -- Drew
Post #311,994 by folkert 7/29/09 10:23:16 PM 7/29/09 10:37:31 PM Reply	Wow... but what about this... http://www.halfbaker..._20Orange_20Juice Huh? Not a bad idea huh? Also, just checking around places... you are starting to get some traction in many places... including Blogs about Food Blogs and SEO places that say "You need to do things like this" and give a Third of your page. Or places that "reformulate" your Content... Also, you might want to check the "re-bloggers" those that claim you are a write of theirs, when in fact they are scraping and re-doing your content. I'm not sure this place is doing yours, but places like it are springing up REALLY regularly and frequently. ulitzer.com (sys-con media) Google "Aral Balkan Sys-Con" ( http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Aral+Balkan+Sys-Con ) To get a taste of what they are doing to some people. Edited by folkert July 29, 2009, 10:37:31 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #312,008 by drook 7/30/09 8:28:17 AM Reply	Already had to do two DMCA takedown notices There are a ton of sites the take RSS feeds and re-post under their own bylines. I've seen two of them doing mine. One of them, after the takedown notice, switched entirely to Amazon category listings as "posts". The other one dropped my stuff, but still has several other feeds re-posted. I've got some Google Alerts out, so I see all the ones where someone links to me, but I haven't noticed it on the SEO sites. Can you give me some example links? I'd like to see what they're saying. -- Drew
Post #312,019 by folkert 7/30/09 9:25:42 AM Reply	Well, I started... http://blondeintaiwa...-grandmother.html Was the one that made me start really looking... backlinks to that page are what I started with... Some of the Pro Bloggin tools site... really to much for my mind swallow. I was off in another world last night when I was really looking. I went to bed shortly there after and have lost it to entropy. I know I went to Taste Spotting plus a few other "index blog of blogs" and then started searching for your stuff. Then I started looking at Alexa and a few other SEO related firms... gads SOOO much out the, its really tough to remember, as I was sure you were on top of it. I'll try a bit later.
Post #312,041 by drook 7/30/09 11:59:39 AM Reply	I've seen her Google Alerts is pretty good. Maybe I've been putting too much faith in its ability to find all the new stuff. -- Drew
Post #311,995 by static 7/29/09 10:33:56 PM Reply	Obvious question... ... but I gotta ask. Have you asked your existing provider if they can recommend someone? If you're shipping more data then they have a plan for, they may well have a partner who does. Wade. Q:Is it proper to eat cheeseburgers with your fingers? A:No, the fingers should be eaten separately.
Post #311,996 by folkert 7/29/09 10:37:57 PM Reply	Great point.
Post #312,009 by drook 7/30/09 8:28:33 AM Reply	I've asked them, waiting for a reply -- Drew
Post #311,992 by malraux 7/29/09 9:53:48 PM Reply	photobucket, maybe? Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #312,011 by drook 7/30/09 8:30:49 AM Reply	Had Flickr for a while I stopped using them when I hit the cap on their free service. Figured if I was paying for hosting anyway, might as well host them myself. If I'm willing to pay for image hosting again, I might look into them, but I want the photos to come from the same domain as the html. When I stopped using Flickr, neither they nor Photobucket allowed that. -- Drew
Post #312,016 by malraux 7/30/09 8:43:38 AM Reply	photobucket should allow that A good number of Facebook applications were using photobucket to host their images. Regards, -scott Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson.
Post #312,276 by Another Scott 8/6/09 1:00:11 AM Reply	Hosting Matters? http://www.hostmatters.com/vmsasdgl.html It sounds interesting, but I haven't read it closely. "Unmetered" access for $10/mo. The actual bandwidth limit might be rather low for you, if it's like the limits in their standard "Web Hosting" plans. (via an ad on Baloon-Juice) HTH a little. Cheers, Scott.
Post #312,280 by folkert 8/6/09 7:20:51 AM Reply	It not the bits per second he needs... but the MB per month that is killing him. He is at about 65GB per day. He needs more total bandwidth available.

Welcome to IWETHEY!