-
How does direct picure uploading affect server power and storage?
The world changed since we installed Vanilla back in 2007 and vBulletin in 2008. The cost of local file storage and bandwidth have both gone down dramatically, but the cost of cloud storage of images has made the total cost near zero.
We use Amazon S3 for image storing. 3 copies of an attachment are stored in different places around the world. We're paying pennies for the cost of this even though there are many GB of attachments.
We use CloudFlare in front of this for aggressive caching, CDN and for crunching image sizes (we dynamically optimise all images we serve to help make mobile fast). The cost of this is fixed no matter how much we serve.
Basically... it costs dramatically less to store and serve files, and yet is more robust, faster and feature rich.
We do limit the file size of an attachment though, and that's really because image optimisation can only do so much and we do want mobile users to have a good experience.
You are reading a single comment by @Velocio and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
Velocio
How does direct picure uploading affect server power and storage? Not having to upload to a third party and then link a photo means I am doing it more often. If i had a g4 phone I wouldn't bother limiting file size.