This means our app will be dishing out at a minimum of 40GB of data per day -> 1200GB per month! But remember, we have 10,000 daily active users, and each time they access our app they will be loading 1 or many more other users profile pictures into their feed. This isn't too bad when vendors like AWS are charging about $0.025AUD per GB of storage. Then we would be storing 40GB worth of profile pictures into our cloud storage. Now lets also imagine that each one of our 10,000 users uploaded the equivalent 4mb profile picture. Now because our app is super awesome, we start going viral and land ourselves about 10,000 daily active users. Lets assume that the image they upload is of decent quality and about 4mb in size. The user jumps onto their phone and grabs their latest insta/tinder-worthy pic and uploads this to our server.
Lets imagine that we have an application that allows users to upload photos to use as their profile avatar. But we also have to pay for each and every time our data needs to leave the cloud as well. But we can all forget too easily when estimating our cloud storage budget that we're not just required to pay to store the total volume of our data in the cloud. So with the high availability of cloud storage options, and the low cost to stash away gigabytes of data, it's very easy for most of us to dismiss the any concerns about hosting data on the cloud. If you ever meet a developer who says size doesn't matter then you'd expect them to have one sizable cloud budget to work with! For everyone else though, size absolutely matters, especially when dealing with image storage on the cloud.Īlmost every web application I have worked on over the few years has had some form of requirement for image hosting, be it a simple image gallery or user profile picture.
0 kommentar(er)
