Web Hosting Talk : Web Hosting Main Forums : Cloud Hosting : What's suitable for my application - Cloud, VPS or a combo?

[ig77]

Here's what my application does. It uses a CPU intensive COM component to create possibly a large file that I need to store for users to download at any given time. Basically, I need:

1. Possibly high CPU power
2. Disk Space for storing files
3. High bandwidth as users download the files

Currently, I am on a VPS and I can see CPU usage upto 90% most of the time the COM component is at work. I need to find a long term solution. Since I am running this on a shoestring budget (no money from app yet), what do you suggest?

1. Use VPS for creating files, Cloud for file storage
2. Use Cloud for creating files, Cloud for file storage
3. Use a host such as FDCServers.net for storage. Use dedicated to create files.

Or some combination not listed?

Please help me decide

PS: This is a .NET app. The file is created by a windows service, so the environment I move to, should have the capability of running this service.

[ig77]

any help? thanks

[cartika-andrew]

It really depends on how many resources you actually use.

You mention 90% of CPU - but, how much CPU do you have access to? is it a single vCPU? or a dedicated, multiple core CPU?

Other items like how much actual disk do you require? how much actual bandwidth is used during peak periods or over a month?

Does your data store grow with time? or is it pretty static? if it grows, what are your current disk requirements and what is your growth rate?

Fundamentally speaking, you sound like a good candidate for Cloud Computing (of course not everyone supports Windows in the Cloud yet).. but again, it really depends on your real requirements..

also, do you require management services? or will this all be self managed?

My gut tells me that a good VPS will meet your needs. But again, without knowing your actual requirements - I am just guessing here..

[network82]

You basically want Application Hosting not cloud. Cloud services are more focused on Web Service based apps and websites, they tend to not be designed for Applications spec.

Your best bet is going down the Dedi Server route or Semi-Dedi-VPS.

You can pick up basically good spec dedi for a fraction more then a VPS anyway and you'll get to use its full resources, and not encounter problems with resource usage. I've seen many hosts kill high-resource-demanding VPSs because they use allot more of the CPU allocation then others that just tick over averagely, meaning they can't run as many VPSs on each server as they'd like to get maximum return..

Semi-Dedicated-VPS gives you the flexability of VPS, on less loaded host machines giving you more resources..

Also, on a shared hosting stand point. "Windows Services" require full trust which you are not going to get unless its a VPS/Dedi or fully managed service.

[Spunkyasp]

You should consider a hybrid VPS for this request. I recommend WiredTree.

[ig77]

Originally Posted by cartika-andrew

It really depends on how many resources you actually use.

You mention 90% of CPU - but, how much CPU do you have access to? is it a single vCPU? or a dedicated, multiple core CPU?

Other items like how much actual disk do you require? how much actual bandwidth is used during peak periods or over a month?

Does your data store grow with time? or is it pretty static? if it grows, what are your current disk requirements and what is your growth rate?

Fundamentally speaking, you sound like a good candidate for Cloud Computing (of course not everyone supports Windows in the Cloud yet).. but again, it really depends on your real requirements..

also, do you require management services? or will this all be self managed?

My gut tells me that a good VPS will meet your needs. But again, without knowing your actual requirements - I am just guessing here..

I am currently using a single CPU with 768MB RAM. One of the problem is that

I am just not sure how to estimate how much disk space I would need. Ideally, I would like to store the files forever and the data store would grow in time. If disk space and/or bandwidth is expensive, then I need to rethink the model of having the files on the disk for a limited time and/or charging users for multiple downloads. I am confused at this time.

If not required, I'd rather not go the cloud route as it appears to be pretty expensive. Can I get a decent semi dedicated/dedicated server for around $100 per month. If I make money out of this site, I don't mind spending on resources. But I am just not sure. I know this doesn't really help much but I am looking for a solution that can be easily upgraded as and when a need arises.

[network82]

If money is the main issue you should be able to pick up a 2Ghz Duo core Dedi with 250Gb storage for around $100-150 per month, with 2-10Tb of bandwidth. You'll just have to base your product/service around what hardware you can get with such a small budget.

You should really ask yourself how quick you are going to fill up the dispace space.

"Cloud storage" isn't really the answer, its designed more like a CDN so its less like local disk I/O and more like HTTP/FTP access to the storage. So your App would need to expect slow disk read/write. There are some providers with the infrastructure where you read/write files locally and its available via the CDN concept, but they aren't cheap.

As you get bigger, and have money, it would be easier to virtualise a server envirnment running collectively off a SAN or clustered LUN. Very easy to do in Windows 2008 R2. I use a similar concept...

[cartika-andrew]

Originally Posted by ig77

I am currently using a single CPU with 768MB RAM.

if you are reaching capacity with those specs, you should likely be looking for a dedicated single CPU and 2 GB RAM at the minimum. You may actually need 2 CPUs (if you are hitting capacity on a single one) - but, it really depends on what your specific usage is like as sometimes adding more RAM will resolve CPU capacity ..

One of the problem is that
I am just not sure how to estimate how much disk space I would need. Ideally, I would like to store the files forever and the data store would grow in time. If disk space and/or bandwidth is expensive, then I need to rethink the model of having the files on the disk for a limited time and/or charging users for multiple downloads. I am confused at this time.

This will purely depend on how much data you plan on storing and what your growth rate looks like and whether your pricing model has properly accommodated the costs of disk over a long period of time (and not only your actual disk, but, also backing up that disk, etc)

If not required, I'd rather not go the cloud route as it appears to be pretty expensive. Can I get a decent semi dedicated/dedicated server for around $100 per month. If I make money out of this site, I don't mind spending on resources. But I am just not sure. I know this doesn't really help much but I am looking for a solution that can be easily upgraded as and when a need arises.

you really only have so many options here. You can certainly go with a dedicated server and pay for that capacity - and I understand people are saying get a cheapo dedicated for $69 or whatever.. I guess that advise works if you have someone to properly manage the server or do not mind reactive management (ie you contact someone when you notice an issue and have them look at it - of course, this could result in hours of downtime before the issue actually gets resolved)

A hardware level VPS is nice because you have a guarantee of the resources available to you and it acts essentially like a dedicated server at a fraction of the cost - so, you could probably pick up a fully managed one for around your price range with the resources you need. You can then scale that vps server with larger CPU and RAM and disk allotments as needed until you hit a dedicated server range

A software level VPS can sometimes be a route to save money and get access to resources you arent really paying for. Though those resources are available from a pool that all other people sharing your server have access to - so, you are somewhat dependent on your upstream provider and their allocation rates and also at the mercy of others sharing that server whether or not the resources will be available when you need them

A cloud is very similar to the hardware level VPS discussed above, except it has some additional benefits, tends to be more redundant, more scalable and is generally considered to be an elastic, high availability solution with utility type of billing. It actually is usually in the same price range as high end hardware level VPS offerings. Depending on how you use it, it can sometimes work out to be more expensive and sometimes it works out to be much less expensive.

For your specific requirements - and seeing as you do not expect large bursts, etc - you are probably best served with a hardware level VPS that you can slowly and methodically scale until you require your own dedicated server. If high availability matters to you, you can look at a cloud server for a pretty small premium to achieve the same functionality and scalability along with high availability included. But, that is solely dependent on how risk adverse you are to downtime.

After that, I think your budget will be solely dependent on level of management you require. For something completely unmanaged, you could probably get into that $60-$80 range for a dedicated CPU and 2 GB ram with a decent amount of disk and bandwidth. For something similar, that is really fully and proactively managed, you are probably in the $100-$150/month range.

[tim2718281]

Originally Posted by ig77

I am just not sure how to estimate how much disk space I would need.

How big are the files? How many are created per day?

Without that information, no-one can advise you.

For example, if the files are 4GB DVD images, and you aim to create 10 a day, you need to increase your disk space by 1200GB a month. You're not going to be able to do that with most VPS or dedicated server offerings.

[ig77]

Originally Posted by tim2718281

How big are the files? How many are created per day?

Without that information, no-one can advise you.

For example, if the files are 4GB DVD images, and you aim to create 10 a day, you need to increase your disk space by 1200GB a month. You're not going to be able to do that with most VPS or dedicated server offerings.

If I run some stats on the existing numbers, it runs to about 6GB every month. My hope is that this will exponentially increase. I am not even sure if this disk requirement is something to worry about.

One thing that comes to mind is that the business model is such that I would charge the users a one time fee to create a file and would let them keep their files forever. Since disk space is a recurring expense, I wonder how other websites out there with similar requirement do it.

[Sc00by22]

Originally Posted by ig77

One thing that comes to mind is that the business model is such that I would charge the users a one time fee to create a file and would let them keep their files forever. Since disk space is a recurring expense, I wonder how other websites out there with similar requirement do it.

Most websites out there that deal with storing files for users have a recurring fee, an example would be RapidShare.com, this allows them to pay their recurring expenses.

[tim2718281]

Originally Posted by ig77

If I run some stats on the existing numbers, it runs to about 6GB every month.

Sorry, I don't understand the answer.

Do you mean the total size of the data increases by 6GB each month?

Or do you mean the total size of the data is about 6GB?

And when you say you hope it will increase, what rate of increase will you plan for?

That is:

1) How much disk space do you need today?
2) How much disk space will you plan on using in a year's time?

[ig77]

Originally Posted by tim2718281

Sorry, I don't understand the answer.

Do you mean the total size of the data increases by 6GB each month?

Or do you mean the total size of the data is about 6GB?

And when you say you hope it will increase, what rate of increase will you plan for?

That is:

1) How much disk space do you need today?
2) How much disk space will you plan on using in a year's time?

Sorry for not being clear. I need 6GB of disk space as of today (website is in operation for 1 month). The disk space in a year's time would be 72GB at the current rate.

[cloudharmony]

cloud is a great fit for what you are trying to do. Here is one possible setup you could consider:

1. Possibly high CPU power

Use a cloud server provider like RackspaceCloud to host your .NET app on a windows server. Their prices run about $0.08/hr ($58/mo) for a 1GB windows 2003/2008 server. During high load periods you can resize your server to 2GB ($0.16/hr), 4GB ($0.32/hr)... and then shrink back to 1GB during low use (one caveat: resize requires a reboot). Gogrid and EC2 also offer similar servers

2. Disk Space for storing files

1GB rackspacecloud windows server includes 40GB diskspace, 2GB includes 80 GB, etc.

3. High bandwidth as users download the files

Use a CDN for file downloads, this will improve download speeds greatly and offload that from your server. Setup is simple (just point the CDN to your windows server as the origin at it will mirrow the content) and you'll only pay $0.10-0.30/GB (depending on the CDN). <<removed>>. Edgecast (via GoGrid) and CacheFly are a couple of good CDNs.

[tim2718281]

Originally Posted by ig77

Sorry for not being clear. I need 6GB of disk space as of today (website is in operation for 1 month). The disk space in a year's time would be 72GB at the current rate.

I think 72GB would be approaching the top end of most VPS plans.

You probably need to backup the 6GB a month - eg by downloading to your home computer, and maybe making DVD copies too.

It sounds as if your network load is light, so you probably won't need faster than 100mbps network port.

So I guess you need to keep using your VPS as long as you can, and get some money in so you can replace it with a low-end dedicated server, costing maybe $75-$100 a month, assuming the processors would be powerful enough to complete work fast enough.