Who do you use for content delivery? (If that is even the right phrase)
-
@jt1001001 said in Who do you use for content delivery? (If that is even the right phrase):
Are they using Cloudflare today?
No. I have been looking at it, and I'm trying to figure out if it will work for them.
The process with them is not completely clear. When I visit this page: https://www.cloudflare.com/cdn/ it is not clear if they are a caching service, or if I would upload my files to their servers and the file would be served by them.
When I look at their "Compare Plans", it's unclear how much data you can store for $20/mo or how much bandwidth you get to use.
I think I don't understand what CloudFlare does.
This is what I am think I need, please explain if I am missing other options: Sometime when I visit a site where I am going to download software they author, I see the download link is actually pointing to AWS. So I assume they are paying AWS to store the file and then deliver the file to an end user when they click the link.
-
@JasGot They are a CDN. By default they will cache static page information to save you the bandwidth. For free.
Moving into paid plans, you get control over things.
-
@JaredBusch said in Who do you use for content delivery? (If that is even the right phrase):
@JasGot They are a CDN. By default they will cache static page information to save you the bandwidth. For free.
CDN doesn't host, just cache. So if storage space is the problem CDN wont help.
-
@JasGot said in Who do you use for content delivery? (If that is even the right phrase):
We have a client that has a website hosted elsewhere.
Their hosting provider has told them they will not allow them to upload any more media to their site for visitors to view because there is simply too much data.
For many reasons, they CANNOT move their hosting.
I suggested they upload their media to a CDN service and change their links to point to the service for their many large media files for visitors to download.
Who do you use/prefer?
It's might even not be possible. I assume they are not editing html on their site.
-
@Pete-S said in Who do you use for content delivery? (If that is even the right phrase):
CDN doesn't host, just cache. So if storage space is the problem CDN wont help.
I read his post as too much data transfer. But, after rereading it, you are likely more correct.
-
@JaredBusch said in Who do you use for content delivery? (If that is even the right phrase):
@Pete-S said in Who do you use for content delivery? (If that is even the right phrase):
CDN doesn't host, just cache. So if storage space is the problem CDN wont help.
I read his post as too much data transfer. But, after rereading it, you are likely more correct.
Yeah, it's what I think might be going on.
And to be honest the only real scenario I could think of is that they have huge amount of data (hundreds of GB or TBs) and the provider doesn't have a plan big enough. Or the data is stored in a database, like a CRM for instance, and the database is grinding to a halt with too many huge files in it.
-
@JasGot Are these media files images or videos? For images, they can look into something like the Smush Pro plugin (provided they're using WordPress CMS), videos can be easily hosted elsewhere like on YouTube or Vimeo and simply embedded to the website instead. Or they're talking about excess traffic caused by this activity?
-
@Pete-S said in Who do you use for content delivery? (If that is even the right phrase):
@JaredBusch said in Who do you use for content delivery? (If that is even the right phrase):
@JasGot They are a CDN. By default they will cache static page information to save you the bandwidth. For free.
CDN doesn't host, just cache. So if storage space is the problem CDN wont help.
Some providers do provide hosting and call it a CDN. Rackspace comes to mind.
-
We used Rackspace for this in the past, and they were okay. That's what ML used to use, in fact.
AWS is the market leader here, of course. Wasabi, Backblaze, Azure... all major players. A lot comes down to what you want. You want that CDN to just be blob storage on large scale, Wasabi is amazing, but if you need it for image hosting for your site's actual in line images, might be too slow. If you want streaming media, CloudFlare's media offering is going to be the best way to go. It depends a bit on the media and it's size, type, and need.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Who do you use for content delivery? (If that is even the right phrase):
We used Rackspace for this in the past, and they were okay. That's what ML used to use, in fact.
AWS is the market leader here, of course. Wasabi, Backblaze, Azure... all major players. A lot comes down to what you want. You want that CDN to just be blob storage on large scale, Wasabi is amazing, but if you need it for image hosting for your site's actual in line images, might be too slow. If you want streaming media, CloudFlare's media offering is going to be the best way to go. It depends a bit on the media and it's size, type, and need.
Thanks. I'm getting more info on media types and sizes this morning.
-
@JasGot in my email jsut now.
-
Clicking through, this is what it is.
-
A CDN needs an origin to pull the data from and THEN cache it. Azure blob storage is one of many options you can go with. Comes with pretty much unlimited space (in petabytes).
-
BunnyCDN
-
Is a CDN even needed? Or just a better place to host your files that offers more space and bandwidth? What are requirements for the CDN?
-
@Obsolesce said in Who do you use for content delivery? (If that is even the right phrase):
Is a CDN even needed? Or just a better place to host your files that offers more space and bandwidth? What are requirements for the CDN?
This is exactly what I now think.
-
@JaredBusch said in Who do you use for content delivery? (If that is even the right phrase):
@JasGot in my email jsut now.
We've been evaluating using that for a bit. Aren't using it yet, but it's on our radar.
-
From the end user:
For all file types, my maximum upload file size with the host is 10 MB. Images: jpeg Quantity: unlimited Avg. size: 1 MB, not more than 2 Videos don’t get loaded up to the website, we just link to our YouTube channel and are able to embed videos from there. Other: pdf Quantity: unlimited Avg. size: Truly such a variation. Presently, the number of things on our website above 10 MB is extremely limited because we have to get specific permission every time to upload a larger file, and even then it’s only a bit more than 10. We have some epub/pdf files we’d like to add that are huge. The best example is a picture book. We’d probably separate it into two files (Old and New ), but even reduced as much as possible, those files are 18 MB and 25 MB. -
So it is definitely a hosting policy. The question is, what would be a good choice to just house files so they can be linked to from their main website?
Oops, forgot to get the answer about inline images v. downloads. BRB.
-
@JasGot oh, they definitely want something like Wasabi for that. Your web host is never the right place for hosting things like a large PDF for someone to download. The needs of a normal website and the needs of large file download hosting don't line up. Even as a web host ourselves, we'd never use our own web services for that, we'd use a blob hosting service (even if it was our own.) This is where the Wasabi, AWS, Azure, etc. of the world are exactly what is needed. Very cheap, very easy.
