For the first time in several months I checked my Image serving bandwidth. Its disturbing to see it crossed 1 TB/day serving 171 million images. This isn’t even all my image traffic as its only the stuff I’m sending through Akamai.
In order to meet all my image requirements I installed a 6TB Storage array today that will handle the millions of full sized images being uploaded every month to the site. I’ve been tossing the originals till now, but i figure i should keep them. I’m doing a total around 2- 3TB a day now, If I didn’t have compression (GZIP) turned on for asp.net pages I’d be serving at least another 2 TB extra per day. All combined with images, page requests and IM status polling there are about 600 to 700 million “hits” per day.
Image traffic only
August 11, 2007 at 2:13 am |
Damn. You must sit back and at laugh at match.com and guys like that when you look at this stuff.
It’s a beautiful day, you’re looking across to the north shore mountains and those guys are running around like a bunch of chickens with their heads cut off wondering how they’re going to save their ship from sinking.
August 11, 2007 at 8:43 am |
Hi,
i saw you walk down yaletown tonight with 2 girls…I yelled “you rock Markus”
rock on
-rob
August 11, 2007 at 10:33 am |
How much does using that amount of bandwidth cost ?
August 11, 2007 at 2:07 pm |
Markus, have you ever thought about trying out Amazon s3? I wonder if it would save you a bit of money?
http://www.amazon.com/gp/browse.html?node=16427261
August 11, 2007 at 4:23 pm |
I definately want to use something like S3 when they get it geo load balanced.
I didn’t hear you Rob, was to busy with the girls lol
August 12, 2007 at 1:10 am |
[...] read a post today in the Plenty of Fish Blog about his Content Delivery Network (CDN) for his static content. He [...]
August 12, 2007 at 9:18 pm |
Impressive stats! Why don’t you limit the size of the images during upload?
Users uploading massive .JPG images will kill the site.
Good luck!
http://www.dynamicdates.co.uk the free alternative to illicit-encounters.com LOL
August 12, 2007 at 10:53 pm |
They are on average 6kb in size. You can’t get much smaller than that. The bandwidth numbers don’t mean a thing, its the sheer number of files that are painful. Youtube was only doing 100 million videos a day when it got sold, i’m doing 200 million images a day. It creates all kinds of performance issues because the disks can’t spin fast enough.
August 13, 2007 at 9:19 am |
Markus, this is amazing.
Do you have a geo graph showing where the connections are coming from (i.e. which Akamai node they’re hitting)?
August 13, 2007 at 5:15 pm |
Any info on the percentage of repeat to unique images? Not that it matters if you are CDNing everything (let them worry about it), but I wonder if a large caching system is a worthwhile investment for those that aren’t.
There was a discussion somewhere about photo.net entertaining the possibility of a 64GB machine to cache all of their small thumbnails.
August 13, 2007 at 9:30 pm |
I just looked at 2 images on one profile 10kb and 12kb, sure they are 6kb on average?
It all adds up dude
Still if you complicate pic uploading the site will suffer!
August 16, 2007 at 9:08 am |
You will need much more disk spindles to handle the peak traffic. Partitioning the data would be the way to scale.
Regarding to the bandwidth cost, it is probably around 20K/month, just a wild estimate