Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Media and website on one server or two?

Options
  • 16-07-2008 7:19pm
    #1
    colm_c
    Registered Users Posts: 2,031 ✭✭✭


    We're looking into specing out a dedicated server (or two) for one of our clients who is outgrowing their current server due to lots of new videoes and podcasts on their site.

    They are not an integral part of the site but do feature on quite a number of pages.

    They favour one server with lots of space and bandwidth, but I think it might be a better idea to use one fast web server for their website and a secondary storage server for their media, possibly on a subdomain.

    It means their actual 'site' is relatively small and all the big files go to a server which could be expanded with disks as needs be.

    Cost isn't too much of a concern for an extra server.

    Any one got any thoughts or does it really matter? Are there any pros/cons for either approach?


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    mneylon
    Registered Users Posts: 7,739 ✭✭✭mneylon


    It depends on traffic and how much data you're going to serve

    Where are the bottlenecks at present?

    Blog | Tweets



  • Options
    #3
    ntlbell
    Registered Users Posts: 16,288 ✭✭✭✭ntlbell


    yea far more information is needed


  • Options
    #4
    colm_c
    Registered Users Posts: 2,031 ✭✭✭colm_c


    No bottlenecks yet - they're planning on having something along the following lines:

    Initially they will have 50 videos (flash) ~70MB each and 100 podcasts ~30MB each.

    Potentially 3,000+ views of videos and 3,000 views of podcasts per month.

    The number of video & podcasts would be continually growing.

    The site itself will be just HTML - no database involvement, the CMS publishes out flat files.


  • Options
    #5
    ntlbell
    Registered Users Posts: 16,288 ✭✭✭✭ntlbell


    with that amount of hits you won't see much of a benift it's only 100 hits a day


  • Options
    #6
    steve-hosting36
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,161 ✭✭✭steve-hosting36


    You wont see any benefit with those traffic levels, any good enterprise dedicated server should give you scalability in all the key metrics, or look at scalable virtual platforms / cloud platforms as an alternative.

    You can split the architecture 'logically' - ie: have the media on a seperate subdomain and disk group, but on the same server, so that if a physical split is warranted at a later date, you won't have to reinvent the wheel.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #7
    minttea
    Subscribers Posts: 78 ✭✭minttea


    I'd recommend splitting it into a sub domain, you can run everything on the same server until you need/have to run it on a different server.

    If you really need to split out you should have a look at Amazons S3 service, http://www.amazon.com/gp/browse.html?node=16427261

    It's great for storing and serving all types of media files....


Advertisement