I was running www.Photopea.com with 10M page views a month for $40 a year.
Now, I upgraded to $60 a month. I never used any CDN.
We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400
51–60 of 426 posts
Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
But they could deliver potentially ~300TB with a 1gbps unmetered link. Not that hard to come by, could even get to 3PB for $300/mo. Back in the day we used Texan Colo data centers with DrFTPD to do just this at massive scale. Bytes in, bytes out. Not a popular opinion here, but I firmly believe it's not necessary to play the CentralizedFlare game to get a winning outcome.
> But they could deliver potentially ~300TB with a 1gbps unmetered link. Not that hard to come by, could even get to 3PB for $300/mo. Cloudflare Pro is $20/month per domain. Trying to run everything through a single server in a single datacenter just doesn't compare for globally-accessed websites like this, even with a 1Gbps unmetered link.
I must be missing something, are you able to elaborate on how CentralizedPro Flare for $20 solves the OPs problems?
I've accessed plenty of sites physically located in the USA from various EU countries, not to mention AUS and I didn't notice much difference as long as they had a good interconnect.
Maybe not the best for YouTube, but there's only a few of those.
Don't get me wrong, I see the appeal and fell for CF early on but not a fan anymore since they've grown into such a behemoth.
Absolutely power corrupts absolutely.
Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400
#53It is annoying that the answer is basically "we paid someone [Cloudflare] to do it." In light of that I decided to run some of my own numbers and figure it out. They are pushing about 245 Mbps out of Cloudflare (averaged over the month). Wholesale IP transit prices are anywhere from 10 cents to a dollar per Mbps depending on volume. Cloudflare dumps 40% of their traffic over peering, putting their price at $14.70/mo.…
> Wholesale IP transit prices are anywhere from 10 cents to a dollar per Mbps depending on volume. 10 cents is far from the lower end for high quality IP transit. Cloudflare doesn't pay anywhere near $14.70/mo for 80 TB/mo. Even I spend much less than that on 80 TB in a month. On top of that, peering makes it even cheaper for Cloudflare, as you said. Cloudflare is very likely using peering for much more than 40 % of…
I was conservative in my estimates for IP transit because I don't know what CF pays, but the numbers only get better for them.
Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A capable dedicated server with 2 TB of disk and 1 Gbps unlimited bandwidth will run about $30 in a major European metro, maybe double that for the US. Not even close to comparable. I think you're ignoring all of the functions they're paying for. They're not just hosting a few files. Also, your "worst case" is literally the most optimistic best case for a standalone single server, which completely disregards any re…
But they could deliver potentially ~300TB with a 1gbps unmetered link. Not that hard to come by, could even get to 3PB for $300/mo. Back in the day we used Texan Colo data centers with DrFTPD to do just this at massive scale. Bytes in, bytes out. Not a popular opinion here, but I firmly believe it's not necessary to play the CentralizedFlare game to get a winning outcome.
For the average person, why make it unnecessarily hard on yourself?
If it’s not your core competency and unless you possess the vast breadth and depth of skills to dig yourself out if something goes wrong, it seems like a distraction at best and a fatal mistake at worst, with the end result of saving 1-2 engineer hours worth of money per month.
For some self-hosting is a no-brainer, but I suspect that community is much smaller than many here would expect.
Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400
#55It is annoying that the answer is basically "we paid someone [Cloudflare] to do it." In light of that I decided to run some of my own numbers and figure it out. They are pushing about 245 Mbps out of Cloudflare (averaged over the month). Wholesale IP transit prices are anywhere from 10 cents to a dollar per Mbps depending on volume. Cloudflare dumps 40% of their traffic over peering, putting their price at $14.70/mo.…
[deleted]
Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But they could deliver potentially ~300TB with a 1gbps unmetered link. Not that hard to come by, could even get to 3PB for $300/mo. Cloudflare Pro is $20/month per domain. Trying to run everything through a single server in a single datacenter just doesn't compare for globally-accessed websites like this, even with a 1Gbps unmetered link.
I must be missing something, are you able to elaborate on how CentralizedPro Flare for $20 solves the OPs problems? I've accessed plenty of sites physically located in the USA from various EU countries, not to mention AUS and I didn't notice much difference as long as they had a good interconnect. Maybe not the best for YouTube, but there's only a few of those. Don't get me wrong, I see the appeal and fell for CF ear…
Are you referring to the linked article? It literally explains what Cloudflare does for them.
Everything might make more sense if you visit their website: https://polyhaven.com/ It's not just a dumb, static file server.
EDIT: The questions below are literally explained in the article, so I'm going to give up on this thread.
Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400
#57Uh, so how does cloudflare do it, since the answer is basically "cloudflare". They have sweet deals with the cloud providers?
Cloudflare is currently operating at a close to break-even loss.
Sure, because we're hiring like crazy to build new things. As we said during our last earnings call, we intend to stay at break even as long as we can achieve extraordinary revenue growth and continue to deliver innovative new products.
The more relevant number for this comparison would be our gross margin — much we have to spend on things like bandwidth and servers to service our customers divided by the revenue those customers generate — which in Q3 2021 (our last reported quarter) was 78%. Which is… pretty good for a services business like ours.
I don't know the specifics of this customer, but I don't see anything that leads me to believe our margins would be out of the ordinary with them. There are a lot of scale economics in our business. In other words, we can definitely do things for less money because we service a lot of customers than any one customer could hope to do it on their own.
Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The bulk of the traffic is serving static files. The bulk of the data transferring is static files because they're hosting large assets, but the rest of the article is about their API, database, etc. A single server in a single datacenter isn't comparable to a global CDN. They made it clear in the article that they value global latency, and they're willing to pay more for it. > Here is a 3.3 GHz Xeon, 24 GB of RAM,…
24 GB of RAM means a lot of ability to cache data in RAM, which the OS does already by default. It of course depends on the type of content you have but generally traffic follows a power law, so most content can be served from RAM directly. The write side I'm a bit more worried about, as e.g. SQLite issues a sync request on each transaction (not sure about the other SQL implementations, should be similar there tho),…
The article explains that they have database and API usage. You can't run a high-throughput database on spinning disks unless you disregard data integrity.
It's not just a static fileserver, despite some of the comparisons in this thread.
Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400
#59I don't believe Argo is still needed? Tiered Caching is now a free feature.
Re: We handle 80TB and 5M page views a month for under $400
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure you are for something like serving large image files (like, say 3D asset files?)... I serve >30TB/month off a Hetzner server with rotating rust drives for like $50/month doing pretty much that, multi-terabyte image datasets and gigabyte-sized DL models. Plus a few websites, which you've probably seen. Zero optimization, just rsync and nginx with defaults, works fine. (It'd be way cheaper except I wanted another…
> I serve >30TB/month off a Hetzner server with rotating rust drives for like $50/month You could probably do it with Cloudflare for a similar price, but that's not what this article is about. The article says that their Cloudflare (not Argo) bill is only $40/month, and that's only because they have two domains. It's $20/month per domain. The $400/month figure isn't just for static file hosting. It includes their API…
> They make a point to say that low-latency, global CDN is a priority for them
Which, franky, is dumb. File downloads depend on throughput, not time to first byte like a small javascript file. Once bits start flowing it doesn't matter if they travel half way around the globe.
It is like saying you are trying to optimize an ocean cargo ship for acceleration time.