×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Webhosting For A Large Art Project?

Unknown Lamer posted more than 2 years ago | from the disk-ain't-cheap dept.

Data Storage 137

First time accepted submitter heleneleh writes "I'm in a class at school on Electronic Writing and for my final project I'm trying to upload the entire contents of my computer to a webserver that will preserve the directory structure (I plan on using rsync so that it is continually updated as my files change). I need about 500 GB of space, and I'm willing to spend some money, so I was hoping Slashdot could suggest a reliable hosting service for that type of project. Traffic shouldn't be too high, but the storage space and ssh access are key. If there's another way to do this, I'd love to know about it." I've noticed a lot of VPS providers charge almost nothing for processor time and RAM, but disk is still pretty expensive.

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

137 comments

Dreamhost (2, Informative)

epdp14 (1318641) | more than 2 years ago | (#38291744)

I use dream host... "unlimited space and traffic" they really mean don't go crazy and try to host a google.com mirror off of it. Its pretty cheap, I pay $8 a month. You can run cron jobs, mysql databases, etc. I've been happy with it. I know it is karma/referral whoring but you can use my referral code and get a free domain registration: FOLLOWTHEHORIZON (if you already have a domain just use DREAMBUCKS for $50 off your first year). http://www.dreamhost.com/r.cgi?303747 [dreamhost.com]

Re:Dreamhost (1)

InsightIn140Bytes (2522112) | more than 2 years ago | (#38291762)

I wanted to come pitch in with my datacenter providers, but seems like he didn't need such. However, I still suggest you try FDCServers [fdcservers.net], if you have any kind of need for traffic for your art projects. If not, there are multiple cloud backup providers which should suit your need.

Re:Dreamhost (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38291924)

In my experience, cloud backup providers don't tend to provide block level storage compatible with rsync and similar tools. Which were you going to suggest?

Re:Dreamhost (4, Insightful)

cayenne8 (626475) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292666)

Why not just install Apache, and expose the contents of your computer to the world directly, instead of pushing it to external servers?

If your ISP gives you grief about a server on your account (I hear that some do)....switch to a business account....it isn't that much more and you can run all the servers you want, no caps, no extra charges. Mines only about $69/mo with Cox Business cable.

Re:Dreamhost (2)

Shifty0x88 (1732980) | more than 2 years ago | (#38293680)

I'm with you cayenne8! Why pay for something that you may not need to pay for.

Also install DynDns on the server so you can always go to you server without remembering your ip address( God when I found this service I was ecstatic, no more remember IP Addresses!!!).

If you are unfamiliar with DynDns it just makes a Dns record for you on their server so when you point your ssh client or browser to yourWebServer.dyndns.org it resolves to your public ip address ex: 170.99.99.123 or whatever you are so you can access your files.

Plus is you use apache you can create a sweet web interface to your server and amaze all of your friends!

Re:Dreamhost (1)

quintin3265 (1552941) | more than 2 years ago | (#38294592)

Upload bandwidth is limited. I have a business account at $60/month that provides 2 megabits per second. That's $17 more than the residential service, but you could pay $9.95 and get a webserver that has a connection with 100Mbps of upload bandwidth. If you have 500GB of files to transfer, and you host them on a 2Mbps connection, it would take a month to upload all of the files to even one visitor - and your entire connection will be saturated all the time while you provide poor download speeds to whoever is accessing the server.

Re:Dreamhost (3, Insightful)

SausageOfDoom (930370) | more than 2 years ago | (#38294958)

The obvious corollary is that it will take a month to upload all of the files to the server anyway.

Am I missing something here - how does uploading the 500GB contents of your hard drive to a web server qualify as an art project for an electronic writing class?

Frankly this sounds like an insane and poorly-conceived idea, but unless the OP is uploading 500GB of ripped films or porn, nobody is going to bother trying to download all of it, so if it's just to tick a box as part of a school project, I would have thought hosting it on the end of a 2Mbps connection will be a feature.

Re:Dreamhost (3, Informative)

morari (1080535) | more than 2 years ago | (#38291968)

Dreamhost is great! I've been using them for years to host about a dozen different sites. Nothing [i]quite[/i] as big as what the posters is looking for, but they do claim "unlimited space and traffic". If nothing else, their tech support is ridiculously amazing. When you contact them, you actually get someone that you can understand and that knows exactly what they're doing... even in some of the obtuse situations I've put them in. :)

Re:Dreamhost (5, Informative)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292040)

I'm probably pushing 1TB of photos on DreamHost. They're maybe 98% uptime but for something like I use it for it really doesn't matter. For what I pay it's great.

Plus one of their employees wrote Ceph [newdream.net]. (A FOSS distributed file system).

Re:Dreamhost (2)

epdp14 (1318641) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292098)

I have around 1.5TB of photos and home movies on DH as a web-backup and to share with family without having to sign the rights over to facebook.

Re:Dreamhost (3, Informative)

dreemernj (859414) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292892)

without having to sign the rights over to facebook.

And this way you can do crazy things like require a person authenticate themselves before they can see the picture vs someplace like Facebook where every picture is publicly accessible.

Re:Dreamhost (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38292818)

dreamhost is not a backup or file archival service.

if you've got your whole library of photos on public-facing, public-accessible web pages, great..

but if not.... you could lose the whole thing as your use of their service would be a violation of their aup.

Re:Dreamhost (1)

0100010001010011 (652467) | more than 2 years ago | (#38293022)

Which reminds me. On top of your 'unlimited' web serving data, they also toss in 50GB that you CAN use to back up anything.

Yes I know their TOC.

Re:Dreamhost (2)

Stuarticus (1205322) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292278)

I used Dreamhost for something similar to the requesters needs, but was informed that the 500GB did not include the storage of any "media"files and had to move to another provider at pretty short notice. Would not recommend!

Re:Dreamhost (2)

Luckyo (1726890) | more than 2 years ago | (#38293268)

Dreamhost is cheap, but reliability and speed are not that good. We have a club that hosts its site, smallish but actively used database that fetches content from another database hourly and member email on it. During last year we had several unannounced short site outages, one mail outage that ended up losing day worth of mail randomly (small amount of mail went through, rest got lost) and one maintenance that they announced only a couple of hours before actual maintenance.

There is also an issue of speed, they do not seem to mirror outside US and their speeds to Europe are... well, bad. Takes up to ten seconds to load a text page with php script fetching content from DB (into a table). Guy who has full write access to DB for pushing some changes to it has to often wait really REALLY long for database to update his changes. I've seen up to 30 seconds for change to a single value this autumn, pretty much not usable, although that was partially script's fault for writing more then that value every time afaik,but still inexcusably slow.

It's cheap, but you get what you pay for. Considering that we don't really need reliability that bad, and beside the email loss that one time and slowness being occasionally annoying, it's a functioning system for most of us.

WHT Forum (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38291818)

http://www.webhostingtalk.com/ - This would be a good site to review.

Re:WHT Forum (4, Informative)

billcopc (196330) | more than 2 years ago | (#38291994)

This.

If you have the patience to read reviews for a half hour or so, you will hear all the pros and cons of any given hosting company. On top of that, they often post exclusive deals in that forum which can be quite a bargain. It is *THE* go-to for hosting discussion. Very highly recommended!

Or you could go the no-brainer route and get a cheap dedicated server from a place like Leaseweb. I've been with them for years, and I think they have US-based "bargain servers" starting around $80 or so, but that's entirely self-managed, so you need to know enough to set up your own Apache/SQL stack on CentOS or Ubuntu or whatever the kids are using these days. Like I said, I've been there for 5+ years, their service used to be ass back then but now it's top-notch, and the price is hard to beat for what you're getting. Traffic is cheap there too, heck you can get 100mb unmetered for under 2 bills if you don't mind slightly boring hardware.

Re:WHT Forum (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292322)

But does he need a dedicated server? Even $80/month seems a little steep if all he needs is 500GB of web space to rsync some files to.

VPS for server, storage for storage (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38291820)

Get a bog standard VPS to do the hosting, storage on S3/other cloud storage provider - probably the cheapest way of doing it.

Re:VPS for server, storage for storage (3, Informative)

InsightIn140Bytes (2522112) | more than 2 years ago | (#38291846)

Uh, transfer in and out of S3 is really costly. It's one of the reasons I didn't change my servers there. I would have for processing power and everything else, but the bandwidth is extremely costly.

Re:VPS for server, storage for storage (1)

Trepidity (597) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292010)

Transfer in is currently free as a promotion, but yeah transfer out is pricey. Just storing the data is also fairly pricey compared to low-end shared-hosting options. For example, you could throw up that 500 gigs on a $9/mo Dreamhost account, but it'd cost you $50/mo of S3 storage space even under the reduced-reliability storage option (or $70/mo under the regular one). S3 has much better performance, but it doesn't sound like that's a major consideration here.

Re:VPS for server, storage for storage (2)

Slashdot Parent (995749) | more than 2 years ago | (#38293288)

Transfer in is currently free as a promotion, but yeah transfer out is pricey.

For what it's worth, I don't think free inbound transfer is a promotion. If it is, it sure isn't presented that way on their pricing page [amazon.com].

Obviously that doesn't change the fact that outbound transfer is on the expensive side.

Re:VPS for server, storage for storage (1)

Trepidity (597) | more than 2 years ago | (#38293386)

You're right, it looks like I'm misremembering from a while ago, and they made it permanent. Googling around, it looks like, back when they first introduced the free inbound transfer in 2009, it was billed as a promotion good through June 2010, but then they just kept it.

Bluehost or Hostmonster (1)

pereyra (472221) | more than 2 years ago | (#38291840)

http://www.bluehost.com/
http://www.hostmonster.com/

Unlimited space and SSH Access enabled. Low price. I'm use to backup with rsync my files.

Cons:
The server can to be with high load.

Greetings from Paraguay

Re:Bluehost or Hostmonster (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38292044)

Ahem you are against their TOS. Unless of course your files are in the public folder, and make them part of some website. I host lots of files with them, they warn me about high file count (wonder if they count the hard links correctly since that's what my webapp does) but otherwise they seem good service if you want to easily install php stuff, do email, mysql and postgres...

Re:Bluehost or Hostmonster (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38292242)

avoid bluehost like the plague - complete cowboys with shocking customer service

Re:Bluehost or Hostmonster (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38292638)

Um, their customer service ranks pretty much higher than anybody else's. (I'll back up may uncertified statement if you do)

Re:Bluehost or Hostmonster (2)

lucm (889690) | more than 2 years ago | (#38294528)

I agree, I've been with them for years and they have a very good service. Twice I tried different hosts (more expensive), I even tried Google App commercial offering (which I hated) but I always went back to Bluehost.

Pros:
-uptime
-service
-performance
-the whole package (features, SimpleScript library, etc.)
-clear billing, no scam
-no annoying upsell campaigns (excep the Postini ad when you first access the CPanel)
-their IPs are not on spam blacklists

Cons:
-restrictions for photo/video content
-shared databases are not secured properly (you can see the other user names when you login)

A few times I sold part of my business and had to transfer the domains to a third party, and even if it was taking business away they were very helpful with this.

Re:Bluehost or Hostmonster (1)

RemyBR (1158435) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292948)

Seconded. Support is terrible, my mysql databases got corrupted several times a month because server crashes or shutdown, and they warned me that my account could be syspended because I was hosting a collection of about 30k images (all photographs made by me and others for our website, mind you). There you go with their "unlimited" plan.
I still have an account with them, but just because I couldn't find the time to fully migrate over to a new host. Now I use Slicehost and couldn't be happier. At least they state their limits and honor them.

600 gigs storage, $5.83/month (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 2 years ago | (#38291858)

cheap enough [funio.com] - owned by iweb [iweb.com].

Before they made the split, you could have signed up for the 10-year deal for as low as $1.67/month.

Re:600 gigs storage, $5.83/month (1)

InsightIn140Bytes (2522112) | more than 2 years ago | (#38291908)

I must warn you. These $1-2 a month providers are huge crap. They have large downtime, huge abuse amounts, and sometimes they just disappear. But yeah, what can you expect for a few dollars a month. Less than what you would eat at McDonalds. If you want any kind of guarantee for your data, avoid them.

Re:600 gigs storage, $5.83/month (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292190)

I've been using them for a few years now ... and iweb isn't about to disappear any time soon.

This is just their way of getting attention for their bread and butter - some very nice servers+bandwidth at a very nice price.

Re:600 gigs storage, $5.83/month (3, Informative)

sandytaru (1158959) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292562)

I switched from a $15/month host to a $3/month host (Maiahost.) The previous host was unreliable, had frequent downtime, and was running on some fairly archaic web technology. (At one point, they lost ALL my data with no local backups. That was the last straw; I ran my own backups once a week but that was still a few days of SQL data totally gone.) When I switched, I've had access to instant tech support, 0 unplanned downtime so far, and a library of amazing CMS systems that they're happy to help me implement at no additional cost. Love them to bits. The marketplace for hosting is very competative now, and the overpriced unreliable ones are going to fail eventually.

This was not a great question (4, Insightful)

digitalsushi (137809) | more than 2 years ago | (#38291862)

You might have asked us what the best sports team is, frankly.

I want to see some Ask Slashdot questions with some depth. The focus on breadth is eating Pez candies day after day, and my teeth are rotten and I want a meal.

Re:This was not a great question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38292094)

I haven't had Pez in forever.
I have to order a box for myself this Xmas.

One consistently good candy, excellent service, fantastic add-ons you can wrap your Pez in to expose them in whatever way you wish.
10/10 in all categories. How they can offer such a cheap service is amazing. /tech review of non-tech stuff.

Re:This was not a great question (1)

marcello_dl (667940) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292118)

But some slashdotter might sidestep the whole issue and reply:
BIIIG storage, Small traffic? why not getting a business dsl and host everything on a laptop under linux or a linux vm if you really really can't?

Pro: no upload times.
Contra: no remote backups, needs a bit of admin / network skills, possibly less uptime.

Couple of questions (2)

Nutria (679911) | more than 2 years ago | (#38291872)

a) What the heck is Electronic Writing that it needs a course separate from "regular" writing?

b) 500GB of words is 55 metric arse-loads. What are you not telling us?

Anyway, why aren't you backing the data up to a local USB drive?

Re:Couple of questions (2)

ByOhTek (1181381) | more than 2 years ago | (#38291954)

I don't know about the submitters case, but one case I'm familiar with, is one of my friends teaches Electronic Writing. The idea is that people tend to expect/use different standards in online publications (compare similar topics in a blog to other sources. They tend to expect more pictures, in particular, but paragraph separation and other factors come in. Apparently a less formal standard of writing is also allowed.

Sorry I can't give you more details, that's about all I got from her.

Re:Couple of questions (1)

Nutria (679911) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292224)

1) More pictures?
2) paragraph separation????
3) a less formal standard of writing?

Are you sure this isn't a workshop on writing children's stories?

Re:Couple of questions (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292452)

Yeah, I don't know... It seems to me that if you had a college with lots of writing courses, and you could take a semester that focused on the nuances of writing for online media, that wouldn't be too unreasonable. It might be interesting to pick apart and think about how blogs posts, as a medium, are different from other kinds of short articles. As someone who has done some different kinds of writing, sometimes professionally, it *is* interesting how different media demand subtly different rules of writing.

However, I have a hard time imaging that studying the writing of blog posts would warrant more than a semester, unless you were at the level of getting a PhD doing research into how the Internet is changing the conventions of writing.

Re:Couple of questions (1)

rwv (1636355) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292976)

However, I have a hard time imaging that studying the writing of blog posts would warrant more than a semester, unless you were at the level of getting a PhD doing research into how the Internet is changing the conventions of writing.

For instance, relying on your audience to copyedit your misspellings in their heads and the shocking number of cases where such things don't even get noticed by your readers (i.e. imaging versus imagining).

Re:Couple of questions (4, Insightful)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 2 years ago | (#38293064)

From the summary ("I'm trying to upload the entire contents of my computer to a webserver that will preserve the directory structure") it's some stupid "performance art".

500 gigabytes (5 terabits). Assuming a consumer 10mb down/1mb uplink, it would take (not counting protocol overhead) 1,389 hours (58 days) for the initial upload, by which time we can assume at least some of the data has changed.

Not to mention that if the author has a non-free OS or applications on that computer, they'll be violating plenty of copyrights.

Bottom line: AGH (Ain't Gonna Happen).

Re:Couple of questions (1)

pianosaurus (1347409) | more than 2 years ago | (#38295090)

Bottom line: AGH (Ain't Gonna Happen).

Dear Tom/Barbara: Ain't gonna happen, assuming your assumptions. I have a 100 Mb uplink, and still remember being happy when hard drives became fast enough for me to utilise that. I realise this is unusual for a home connection in most places of the world, but the poster may very well be trying to upload from his campus. I don't know how universities are connected to the net in the US or wherever else the poster may be from, but I'm guessing he (like me) could upload 500 GB in a workday or so.

Also, what is this "millibit" you speak of?

a class to rip people off and take more classes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38292142)

a class to rip people off and take more classes just to drive costs up and make the 4 year degree take 5 years to complete.

Re:Couple of questions (1)

ifrag (984323) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292430)

b) 500GB of words is 55 metric arse-loads. What are you not telling us?

Maybe using PDFs and wants to backup Adobe Reader with it.

Re:Couple of questions (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38292794)

>> b) 500GB of words is 55 metric arse-loads. What are you not telling us?

It's ASCII porn?

Re:Couple of questions (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38293096)

I wanted to say it's porn, but 500GB is waaay too little. And too large for books, calibre for example, I can tell you, it can hold ~20k ebooks in various formats occupying a mere 20GB. Therefor there's only one sensible conclusion, it's very old porn, maybe even ascii and bmp's.

Re:Couple of questions (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 2 years ago | (#38293856)

What the heck is Electronic Writing that it needs a course separate from "regular" writing?

"Regular" writing is the day to day stuff that people need to write - you know, memos, letters, that sort of thing.

"Electronic" writing is probably more known as Technical writing, which is a subfield to writing compliant papers (e.g., to submit to IEEE and other journals), as well as online documentation and printed technical documentation (user manuals, service manuals, etc).

Instructions are particularly important as well, and it can be tricky to get right (as anyone who has ever encountered poorly written instructions may attest to).

Re:Couple of questions (1)

Nutria (679911) | more than 2 years ago | (#38294076)

Ah, Tech Writing. Thanks.

Old-line tech companies (well, that-which-was-DEC did, at least) have been creating tech documentation using computers for 30 years, though.

Duh everyone know this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38291874)

... Go Daddy!

No, duh, colocate a dedicated server or even rent a dedicated server for next to nothing.

I used to host large art projects... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38291900)

...then I took an arrow to the knee.

Consider using a CDN (3, Informative)

firegate (134408) | more than 2 years ago | (#38291906)

You should consider using a Cloud CDN like Rackspace CloudFiles or Amazon S3. They're designed purely for cheap, efficient and fast storage and delivery. While you can't SSH into one, you can certainly set up rsync without incident and the data can be called from a site hosted anywhere.

Re:Consider using a CDN (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38292038)

Cheap is relative. Cloudfiles for 500gb is $75/mo. Pretty sure that's not the submitters definition of cheap.. or he would just purchase a dedicated server instead of posting a question here.

Re:Consider using a CDN (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38293160)

You should consider using a Cloud CDN like Rackspace CloudFiles or Amazon S3. They're designed purely for cheap, efficient and fast storage and delivery. While you can't SSH into one, you can certainly set up rsync without incident and the data can be called from a site hosted anywhere.

You can run an EC2 instance and mount S3 storage as NFS thus you can ssh into it and run anything on top of it using your favorite AMI (amazon machine image) available for nearly every mjaor OS :)

EC2 is the way forward!

Techark (1)

lunatic1969 (1010175) | more than 2 years ago | (#38291934)

I've used Techark for years ( http://www.techark.com/ [techark.com] ). They've been reliable. Nice folks too.

Re:Techark (1)

unrtst (777550) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292534)

No comment on their quality, but their advertised packages don't come close to meeting the very basic requirements of the post.

10 Gig disk space + 150 Gig bandwidth @ $8.95/mo
40 Gig disk space + 300 Gid bandwidth @ $25.95/mo
Dedicated server with 500 Gig disk and 10 Mbps unmetered bandwidth @ $115.95/mo

Sorry, but how's he supposed to get 500 Gig of data up on any of those? Even the dedicated server lacks enough space (OS will chew some up).

Re:Techark (1)

lunatic1969 (1010175) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292606)

I'd recommend contacting them about the specific requirements. I've been using them for years, found them to be reliable with actual people running the show instead of automated drones. And believe me, I've been through quite a few hosts before these folks.

"Entire contents" might get you unwanted attention (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38291946)

What will "entire contents" include? Will this art project be publicly accessible? If you are planning to upload files from your hard drive including program files you did not create (e.g. windows or program files folders), you may be inviting some unexpected attention due to copyright issues.

HostMonster - unlimited space and bandwidth (1)

TheGreatOrangePeel (618581) | more than 2 years ago | (#38291964)

Everyone has their own hosting provider that they prefer. Mine is HostMonster. Hard to argue with unlimited space and bandwidth. Haven't had any issues with uptime in the year I've been hosting with them. They allow SSH access to their hosts (but you have to provide an image of a your drivers license/state ID). Haven't tried to rsync to my server, but then again, I've never had issues using rsync provided I was doing it over ssh (e.g. `rsyc -a -v -e 'ssh -l username' /local/dir hostname:/remote/dir` #going by memory here)

Re:HostMonster - unlimited space and bandwidth (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292708)

If your rsync source/destination is of the format username@hostname:/path/to/files it uses SSH by default.

Dedicated server... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38291980)

At current VPS prices you'd bleed yourself through the nose for enough disk space. The first VPS plan from Linode with that much disk space is $480 a month, whereas you can get a Softlayer dedicated server with a 500GB drive for ~$200 a month.

If it supports directory hierarchy preservation (haven't tried), the cheapest alternative is Amazon S3, which is something like $70 a month for 500GB ($0.14/GB) of space, and another $20 or so per month for an EC2 instance to serve it from. There's at least one FUSE implementation that *should* let you rsync to it as well.

Unlimited spaces != unlimited files (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38292016)

Many hosting services who offer "unlimited space" have other limitations you need to know about so you don't find out in the middle of transferring files that you can't do what you want to do. There are limitations on the number of inodes you can store, which for your purposes would mean the number of files you can store. So if the limit is, for instance, 50,000, then after you have uploaded that many files, you won't be able to upload any more no matter how much space you have left. The other limit I have run into is a daily limit on number of ftp file transfer which I ran into once. The limit on my hosting account was 2000 and once I reached that limit, I got locked out until I contacted tech support. Additionally, read the TOS because they might prohibit using the space to store files for archiving purposes.

modwest (2)

jd142 (129673) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292018)

I've been very happy with http://www.modwest.com over the last 10+ years. Their basic plan is $7/month, but have more expensive plans if you need it. They have unlimited(within reason of course) because they know that only a small percentage of users come close to any limits they would set.

If it's only for your class (3, Informative)

denshao2 (1515775) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292090)

I would host it at home. If it's only for a professor to see, you should not be getting a lot of traffic. Just keep it on a machine that is separate from anything important.

Re:If it's only for your class (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292734)

Sounds good, DynDNS + port forwarding on your home router to a machine/VM running the hosting service = problem solved.

Something is wrong here (4, Insightful)

nine-times (778537) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292174)

I don't mean to be rude, but it seems like you may be approaching this the wrong way. What are you actually doing and why? Why are you looking a VPS providers? You say, "I was hoping Slashdot could suggest a reliable hosting service for that type of project." What type of project? Define "reliable".

To be more specific, why are you trying to upload the entire contents of your hard drive to a web server? Like, if this is a writing project, do you care about copying your program/system files, and if so, why? Why a web server? Is it going to be accessed by someone else? If so, who needs to access it, and where are those people located relative to you (e.g. are they on the same network?)?

If you just need 500 GB of web space, there are lots of shared hosting companies that will provide that much space for less than $10 per month. It will be reliable enough for a lot of purposes. However, not knowing what you're trying to do, I don't know if you're doing something completely silly.

Re:Something is wrong here (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38292288)

Sounds more like he wants a seedbox ;-)

What about your house? (1)

Synerg1y (2169962) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292180)

If it's not high traffic, your ISP will not call TOS violation, and with speeds nowadays, high traffic means pretty high so it depends, you'd have to get the details that are local to your area.

But I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this, or maybe i just didn't read it... but what you do is register a domain and point it at your home IP, set up a web server at home, open port 80 on your router. There are a million factors to consider here, but one less obvious one is you are probably not a high profile target, so default security will probably suffice, just don't use weak or non-existent passwords.

Just cuz they have the coolest looking equipment.. (2)

pr0nd3xtr (702443) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292188)

http://www.backblaze.com/ [backblaze.com] - I always wanted to build one of those 200TB units for $8k too

Re:Just cuz they have the coolest looking equipmen (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292768)

These guys are supposed to be the cheapest in dollars-for-gigs, don't know if anyone's overtaken them. They also claim to offer true encryption, in which only the user has the key.

knows rsync, ssh, and VPS, but... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38292338)

can't answer his/her own question? That doesn't compute.

initial upload (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38292374)

You realize of course that even with reasonably good upload speeds (> 5Mb) its going to take over a solid week to upload 500GB and your ISP will probably cut you off for abusing the system. For that much data you need a service with provisions to handle you sending a disk, so all you do over the internet is deltas.

Dedicated Server Recommended (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38292406)

You should get a dedicated server or a VPS for that kinf of space.

Do you have an idea of your bandwidth requirement

www.Gogax.com

You often get what you pay for... (1)

asdf7890 (1518587) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292510)

I've noticed a lot of VPS providers charge almost nothing for processor time and RAM, but disk is still pretty expensive.

A cheap VPS provider will have "fair use" policies, officially or otherwise (in fact any VPS provider, though good ones are more likely to have well documented policies so you know what standard you are to be judged against). If your VM uses too much CPU time you will find it disabled without warning until you beg to have it turned back on again. The same goes for if you create a lot of I/O activity (i.e. any heavy database work).

You don't have to break your quotas either: I've have a cheap VPS provider cut me off for "to much bandwidth use in a day" when the amount of bandwidth used in the the day in questino was noticably less than "the amount I was supposed to be allowed in a month" divided by 31.

Also, the cheaper the offer the more chance there is that the host machiens will be massively oversold, so you have so many other VMs on the host your's is on that there is so much competition for I/O bandwidth that any disk operation will take much longer than you'd expect to complete. A cheap provider might have tens of VMs all using the one single spinning-metal based SATA drive.

I still have a couple of cheap VPSs that I use for various bits and bobs so if you find reasonable ones all can be fine - they certainly have thier place but be aware of the possible problems. I never have anything hosted on just one of them, so if one goes down or slows to a crawl all I have to do is switch some DNS entries and another takes over. Also, if looking ay OpenVZ never judge a VPS by its "burstable" memory allocation. If you need the memory you need the memory. A fair proportion of the not-the-cheapest-of-the-cheap hosts have stopped offering burstable memory. (swap on Xen is different as you can always allocate the full amount if you need to, but with OpenVZ with burst enabled you don't know until you try which makes some things fall over regularly - apparently Java based apps of any significant size are generaly not happy in such situations for instance, and I've seen rtorrent fall over when there is a suddern glut of incoming data and it hsan't been told to artificially reign in its memory use)

http://www.webhosttingtalk.com/ [webhosttingtalk.com] is a good place to look for hosting information generally, and http://www.lowendbox.com/ [lowendbox.com] is a useful resource if you are looking at the lowest end of the market without wanting to consider shared hosting. If you don't mind signing up for 6 or more months rather than a rolling monthly contract you might find so very reasonable dedicated server offers like those at http://www.kimsufi.co.uk/ [kimsufi.co.uk] (as with a cheap VPS, consider what options you lose by giong cheap such as support and SLAs), again http://www.webhosttingtalk.com/ [webhosttingtalk.com] is a good place to look for offers and discussion. Amazon's free tier (http://aws.amazon.com/free/) may also be worth looking at - you may find that much more stable and less over-sold than a cheap VPS.

Re:You often get what you pay for... (1)

asdf7890 (1518587) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292636)

Actually, cancel the Amazon mention: yout 500Gb isn't going to fit on the free tier by a long shot...

Do you know ... ? (5, Funny)

heatseeker_around (1246024) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292672)

I assume that you know you posted your question on slashdot . So I can assume you know it is a cave full of nerds and geeks all over the place. Some are staring at you from the the ceiling, others are cowardly anonymous and invisible, some also pretend not to be nerds by referring to nerds as "they", "them", "the nerds"... hum...
But all of them have something in common: they need SPECIFICS, they need to know EVERYTHING, they are paranoiac, they are whiners and they hate non-sense !

Examples :
  • - You say, "I was hoping Slashdot could suggest a reliable hosting service for that type of project." What type of project? Define "reliable". (nerd 778537)
  • - To be more specific, why are you trying to upload the entire contents of your hard drive to a web server? (nerd 778537)
  • - What the heck is Electronic Writing that it needs a course separate from "regular" writing? (nerd 679911)
  • - 500GB of words is 55 metric arse-loads. What are you not telling us? (nerd 679911)
  • - You might have asked us what the best sports team is, frankly. (nerd 137809)

Do you really expected to get any valuable answers with your non-specific question ? yeah... be sorry.

To answer to your question anyway, I need to know what kind of movies are you trying to upload illegally ?

No vps (1)

mariushm (1022195) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292728)

VPS won't be good enough for your needs - most VPSes share the disk space (a raid 5 is shared between 8-16 vps machines so they can't give you lots of space).

Talk to various companies advertising budget servers on Web Hosting Talk forums.

You should be able to rent an Atom based server or an older generation server they wouldn't otherwise be able to rent for about 40-50$ a month and some of the companies will even accept to physically mail them a hard drive and install it in your server for a few extra dollars a month.

AWS S3 (1)

funkman (13736) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292806)

http://aws.amazon.com/s3/pricing/ [amazon.com]

For 500GB you are looking at 46.50 or $70 a month for storage alone. I'd think the transfer costs (HTTP traffic) would be pennies based on the traffic patterns described.

You won't be able to use rsync ... but I'd guess there are solutions our there that allow mirror like functionality you describe.

Re:AWS S3 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38292912)

Yes, for example http://s3tools.org/s3cmd

And if it's all static content then S3 can serve all the HTML/CSS/Javascript too.

Host yourself (2)

keith_nt4 (612247) | more than 2 years ago | (#38292934)

Based on the description I don't see why hosting it yourself isn't an option. If you literally have 500 gigs of data get two 1TB drives and build a NAS with the two drives mirrored. For OS you could use either a Linux server with LVM/RAID or a FreeNAS set up with ZFS. You could even virtualize it if you wanted to get fancy (easy to switch physical hardware used if nothing else). Open a port on your router and hand out the IP or setup a DynDNS sort of deal for others to access. You also want a separate USB hard drive to back the data up.

For the amount of money it would take to host all this data the Linux/FreeNAS solution would be much, much cheaper (less than $400US). Also, ridiculously easy to setup an SSH daemon on linux/FrreeBSD.

You sound like you're at some kind of college or university so I assume it wouldn't be too difficult to bribe a local computer scientist with mountain due and pizza to help you out as needed.

Fishy (1)

plsenjy (2104800) | more than 2 years ago | (#38293058)

I know I sound paranoid, but to me it sounds like the submitter is trying to monitor the comings-and-goings of someone else's computer.

Pair Networks = reliable, but you're on your own (1)

Kalvos (137750) | more than 2 years ago | (#38293106)

I've been using Pair Networks [pair.com] for about 15 years. They have the tools and space you need, and you can exactly mirror your present directory structure. It's either shared hosting (some 'dangerous' tools are limited) or your can lease a server. They have high reliability, near zero downtime, a software/hardware maintenance schedule (no surprises). It's FreeBSD Unix and they won't hold your hand with automated tools, so you're on your own.

Re:Pair Networks = reliable, but you're on your ow (1)

Kalvos (137750) | more than 2 years ago | (#38293176)

Also, Pair is amenable to special circumstances, such as high storage / low volume, nonprofits, etc. Use their homepage as a guide, and then email to ask. They answer.

InMotion (1)

yakatz (1176317) | more than 2 years ago | (#38293318)

InMotionHosting offers tons of disk space for a very low price.
I and other people who used to use them highly do not recommend them
Start with these : http://blog.sucuri.net/2011/09/mass-compromise-at-inmotionhosting-com.html [sucuri.net]
http://thehackernews.com/2011/09/inmotion-hosting-server-and-trinity-fm.html [thehackernews.com]

They messed up the cleanup, damaging sites that had already cleaned up by themselves.

Last but not least: http://www.windows8update.com/2011/11/17/top-10-reasons-that-i-dont-use-inmotion-hosting-for-my-website-and-business/ [windows8update.com]

bring the server to you (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38293692)

If bandwidth isn't important, why not just put the server on your local machine?

And submitter "heleneleh" has disappeared. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38293760)

Just brilliant, ask a vague question and then walk away. Don't answer anyone's questions. What a way to waste everyone's time. Thanks a lot, "heleneleh".

Universtiy may host it. (1)

ZombieBraintrust (1685608) | more than 2 years ago | (#38293800)

Talk with your professor first about having the University host it. Your school will have the infrastrure to host this themselves. They may have dedicated space for students. You may need to get an exception to host that much data. This is what your tuition should be paying for.

elitter.net (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38293806)

www.elitter.net obvisouly rools all. Command line access is teh rock!

Host it from home. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38293994)

Based on what you have indicated:
- priority is on space/storage
- priority on reliability of storage
- will not be alot of cpu or bandwidth usage
- you already have the information on your computer's hard drive

Suggested solution:
- get a dyndns account and use that to point to your home, so people can find it. Or just have a script that auto-updates a web page link.
- have the storage on a local Frys special computer or a NAS unit with mirroring of 2 drives.
- give it an assigned ip address either via dhcp or hard coded and port forward from the outside

laptop + xampp + external hard drive (1)

sdnoob (917382) | more than 2 years ago | (#38294106)

take your project to school to demonstrate it, don't put (and keep) a copy of your entire hdd online. that's just pointless.

hosting that much data for a one-off project not intended to remain online is a lot of wasted bits transferred and a lot of wasted time/effort.

also consider upload times for 500gb data....
384k upstream = 126 days, 10m upstream = 5 days
might be able to half those using a transfer scheme with compression, but still, that's a hell of a long time.

(and don't forget about any usage caps enforced by your isp)

EC2 + S3 (1)

dracocat (554744) | more than 2 years ago | (#38294636)

You can just use Amazon S3 Storage. .10 per GB would mean $50 per month for 500 GB.

If you use EC2 for a simple virtual server you can mount the S3 volume onto your virtual server.

If you are like me and prefer rackspace virtual servers, then you can still mount the S3 volume with something like jungle disk.

You can then use something like Jungledisk to mount it as a volume on both machines, server and source machine.

Rackspace has basic virtual servers for like $10 a month.

So $10 for basic virtual server. $50 for 50 GB of disk storage on S3, plus $5 a month for jungle disk.
$65. Is that within your budget for a short term project?

Jungle disk is not required to make it work, but its only $5, and can make it simpler to mount the volume. If you use a virtual server on amazon EC2 you can actually just mount the 500GB volume.

hosting site (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38294648)

I use this place and they are unlimited everything with free ssh and unlimited space and bandwidth. www.tmdhosting.com it cost $3.85 a month and it comes with a free domain name also. Hope this helps. I never had my site go down in 2 years.

Why not MiracleData(tm)? (2)

MiracleData*Sponsor* (2526804) | more than 2 years ago | (#38294852)

Hi folks, Dan from MiracleData(tm) here! I thought I'd take advantage of Slashdot's new AskSlashdot sponsorship feature to throw in my two cents worth, and recommend to you our own line of MiracleServers(tm)! While I am the chairman and CEO of MiracleData(tm), I don't want you to think I'm biased in any way when I say - without fear of contradiction, since I now control the moderation on this thread - that MiracleData(tm) is the greatest service to mankind since the invention of modern medicine! No, that's only because it's absolutely, 100% true!

Now, just to give you an example, how much would you pay for our entry-level MiracleLite(tm) server? It features 64 cores, 512 GB of RAM and over 100 terabytes of disk space! Sounds perfect for your little art project, right? Well, don't answer that price question yet, because a box like that needs a fat pipe to keep it happy, and that's why we're pairing our MiracleLite(tm) server with your own dedicated, unmetered OC-96 line! NOW how much would you pay? Got a number? Good! Now, what if I told you you could have that server and connection for....$1.79 PER YEAR! You'd say that's insane, right? And you'd be RIGHT - it IS insane, because we're INSANE for low prices here at MiracleData!!!1!!11!!!

So in conclusion, I think you can see that MiracleData(tm) is the only sensible choice here. Give us a call to get started today, and remember our motto - "If It's A Good Server, It's A Miracle"!
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...