Results 1 to 9 of 9
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    46

    please recommend specs for a file and image hosting site

    Planning to move my file and image hosting site to its own server next month but still wondering what sort of specs should I get. My site currently have 4.5k++ users with about 50 new users signing up daily. At the moment the site average about 40-50gb bandwidth per day.

    I'm currently leaning towards
    AMD Semp 2400 or a P4 2.8ghz
    2GB RAM
    80-120GB SATA HD
    10-20 Mbps Unmetered

    Running Lighttpd to handle the loads. File and image size fixed at 2mb (maybe will increase to 3mb in the future)

    Will that be good enough? My budget is set at around $200/mo

    Thanks in advance!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Posts
    2,168
    AMD Sempron 2400 with 1 GB RAM should be fine. I personally would reccomend thttpd, but if you have more experience wiht lighttpd then by all means go ahead That budget should be plenty to get you a box you want. You don't really need a SATA HD for this, IDE works fine.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    46
    with the amount of hits and files download, doesn't SATA HD make a difference compared to IDE ?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Miami FL
    Posts
    288
    Originally posted by JHosts
    You don't really need a SATA HD for this, IDE works fine..

    That made me fall on the floor and laugh, he will need SATA

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    1,320
    Howcome SATA is that much better? The only difference is that it does 150MB/sec, instead of 133MB/sec, right?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Atlanta, Georgia
    Posts
    520
    you really won't even see the difference.... if you really need speed you should go up to a decent raid 10 / 50 solution.

  7. #7
    Originally posted by Siet
    Howcome SATA is that much better? The only difference is that it does 150MB/sec, instead of 133MB/sec, right?
    My understanding is that a SATA HD is going to last you longer than an IDE. Disk crashes can be a pain in the neck. Of course, this is only going to be something you'll have to worry about if you'll be running a server for more than a year or two.
    If the bigger hosts are fancy French restaurants, consider my service the friendly small-town diner.
    HostMidwest.com- you deserve honest, helpful, and reliable service!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Syracuse, NY
    Posts
    2,168

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Chicago, Illinois
    Posts
    882
    Originally posted by HostMidwest
    My understanding is that a SATA HD is going to last you longer than an IDE. Disk crashes can be a pain in the neck. Of course, this is only going to be something you'll have to worry about if you'll be running a server for more than a year or two.
    There is some pretty wild ideas about SATA being posted here. The performance difference between a 7200rpm sata vs 7200rpm IDE is very minimal. As for SATA lasting longer, where do you get this information from? The drives come with the same length warrantees as their IDE counterparts, and the IDE standard isn't going to go anywhere for a long time.

    The only way you are going to get a really noticeable difference between SATA-IDE is when using 10,000RPM SATA drives.

    Either way, if you want the best performance from these types of drives RAID is the only way to truely boost capacity.
    Neosurge Web Services since 2002
    Neosurge VPS Hosting

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •