Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Petabytes

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    254

    Petabytes

    Is it possible to have 3-4 Petabytes of transfer a month? An example would be, to have say a 3 GB file downloaded 1,000,000 times in a given month, would amount to 3 Petabytes.

    Or am is there something wrong with my reasoning (it's late, I may be wrong).

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    6,601
    Well you *could* but you would need multiple servers. I think its about 30-40,000mbit of traffic..

    Rus
    Russ Foster - Industry Curmudgeon

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    California
    Posts
    254
    About how much would that end up costing, on average?

    I still don't understand how YouTube can turn a profit or even stay out of enormous debt with the massive amounts of videos they show. (Do they use a codec that reduces the size greatly because my 3 minute file is 320 MB in size and that seems really large if I were to transfer it to 1000 people).

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    91
    As far as im aware they didnt actually make a profit from the site and it was funded by other companies, if i remember correctly before google bought them they were already lending a hand.

    But i could be wrong so dont quote me on that

  5. #5
    Never heard of that yet. 3-4 Petabytes!!!!!! Please inform me if you find one.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Chattanooga
    Posts
    8,985
    Quote Originally Posted by ahsan16
    Never heard of that yet. 3-4 Petabytes!!!!!! Please inform me if you find one.
    Dreamhost should have their petabyte package launched by next week I hear.
    Mmmm, dreamy. Now if only they'd wake up.
    David
    Web hosting by Fused For businesses with more important things to do than worry about their hosting.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    5,068
    To transfer 3 PB a month you would need a constant transfer rate of 9,71 Gbit per second (probably rather 11-12 considering the network overhead). With today's network technology I would say this is impossible with a single machine, especially over the Internet.
    Sitemeer.com - Is your site up?
    Multi-Location Service Availability Check ● yes, we do HTTPS & IDN!


  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,270
    Quote Originally Posted by Zaitech
    About how much would that end up costing, on average?

    I still don't understand how YouTube can turn a profit or even stay out of enormous debt with the massive amounts of videos they show. (Do they use a codec that reduces the size greatly because my 3 minute file is 320 MB in size and that seems really large if I were to transfer it to 1000 people).
    You just have to encode your video right. That 3 minute could be as low as 4 MB if encoded right and you won't lose much quality. That is one thing to keep the costs down and with flash you only need to load the video once. So i a person watchs a video 10 times. They will download it from the server one time. I bet there are other tricks they use to lower bandwidth.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Chicagoland Area
    Posts
    4

    Bandwidth is the constraint

    Even with great encoding, most online video is still blocky at full-screen and doesn't look that great. If everything is trending towards higher resolution video, I don't know how it will be possible to support pushing "all that video" through the pipe.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    174
    Quote Originally Posted by mohamoud
    You just have to encode your video right. That 3 minute could be as low as 4 MB if encoded right and you won't lose much quality. That is one thing to keep the costs down and with flash you only need to load the video once. So i a person watchs a video 10 times. They will download it from the server one time. I bet there are other tricks they use to lower bandwidth.
    Although this may be true but what codecs do this? ok, XViD is the main most popular codec, but this isnt loading onto windows as a default,
    and as far as I am aware Youtube doesnt use any special codec you need to download before hand

  11. #11
    Finding something with Petabytes to start will cost you a bundle using dedicated servers. Your better solution is to look at how you are compressing your video.

    By what you have mentioned, that your 3 minute video is 350mb, it sounds like you have no compression whatsoever on your video clip. I would recommend that you look into a combination of compression, and streaming videos, and then choose a host based off of that.

    As for youtube: Youtube uses flash to stream the videos. So while most people can see them by default, you do need Flash to view them.

    XVid and DivX cannot be streamed as far as I know. In these cases you would be looking at having people download them and then watch the videos off your website.

    Be sure to check the TOS and / or ask techsupport of potential hosters to see if these are allowed.

Posting Permissions

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