I currently have a hosting plan with 150 Gb of storage space and multiple web sites, including PHP and Rails projects. Moving to another hosting provider would be difficult, so I'm considering alternatives for more storage space. Currently, I pay $10 a month for this hosting plan, but the storage space is limited and cannot be increased without upgrading to a more expensive plan.

The storage space issue was mainly caused by the static files from the Rails project. Each uploaded image requires the original file and four additional copies of different sizes, leading to a lot of storage usage. I am now considering using Amazon S3 to transfer and store all static files from the Rails project and user uploads. However, I am concerned about the cost, particularly for 30,000 GET requests per month. The images that need to be stored on Amazon S3 are frequently accessed, so there will be at least two GET requests in each session.

I am trying to find the most cost-effective solution and am open to suggestions. Cloud hosting is not something I am familiar with, so I am not sure how it would work for my Rails project and other PHP sites. If Amazon S3 ends up being more expensive than upgrading my current hosting plan, then I will need to consider upgrading instead.

It is possible to have a separate engine for your website, and for $5, you can enable it on your hosting plan. However, the downloaded files are stored separately, and I currently have several gigabytes of these files saved on a Cloud Storage service. The benefit of using Cloud Storage is that it provides a very inexpensive option for file storage without an engine, with gigabytes of files costing only a few cents per month.

To use an engine on another hosting provider, we would only need to pay a small fee. The exact number of queries that will need to be built can be calculated easily, and statistics from our current server will be helpful in determining this information, including the number of requests and the size of each file. However, it is important to note that my files may differ from others, and this could impact cost calculations.

If you are running out of space on your hosting plan, it may be worth considering other servers, which although more expensive, offer more opportunities and fewer restrictions. One option to consider is Kimsufi or Soyoustart. I personally use Soyoustart and have not regretted it. The only downside I have found is that if there is an issue with the server (such as a failing disk in a RAID setup), you need to provide all the necessary data to replace it before they can see it themselves. However, this is not a major issue, and if your disk is already dead, then they will resolve the problem for you.

It's always better to have backups, and Soyoustart has a built-in backup server with 500GB of storage that is only accessible via FTP from the server you ordered. However, it may not be very convenient to add additional files to this backup server.

I've recently been looking into cloud hosting options from Amazon and Google. However, I found that their prices (even with discounts for longer-term commitments) are 2-3 times higher than buying a VPS or dedicated server from a different provider. In fact, when I compared the cost of my $10 VPS with the same configuration in the cloud, it ended up costing $30 per month for the same amount of resources. At that price point, it is more cost-effective to use a dedicated server.

Therefore, it's best to consider either a fully-fledged server or a larger subscription plan. An affordable option from OVH is available for around $40, providing 2 terabytes of storage space, which should be plenty for all requirements.

While on the surface it seems like a practical solution, you're concerned about the cost, particularly for the number of GET requests you'll be making.

Upgrading your current hosting plan may be one option, but let's first explore the possibility of using Amazon S3 and see if it can provide a more cost-effective solution for your needs. Amazon S3 is a highly scalable and reliable storage service offered by Amazon Web Services (AWS). It allows you to store and retrieve large amounts of data at any time.

To better understand the potential cost implications of using Amazon S3, you should consider the pricing model. Amazon S3 pricing typically involves two main components: storage costs based on the amount of data you store, and request costs based on the number of requests you make.

In your case, since you mentioned having at least two GET requests per session and approximately 30,000 GET requests per month, you need to evaluate how this aligns with Amazon S3 pricing. You can refer to the AWS Pricing Calculator or consult the AWS documentation for detailed information on S3 pricing.

It's worth noting that besides Amazon S3, there are other cloud storage providers available, each with their own pricing models. You could also explore options like Google Cloud Storage or Microsoft Azure Blob Storage.

Regarding your concern about integrating Amazon S3 with your Rails project and PHP sites, both languages have libraries and frameworks that offer seamless integration with cloud storage services like Amazon S3. These libraries simplify the process of storing and retrieving files from the cloud and can help you efficiently integrate with the desired cloud storage provider.

Ultimately, the most cost-effective solution will depend on various factors including your expected usage patterns, the size of your files, and the frequency of access. I recommend calculating the potential costs for using Amazon S3 and compare them with the cost of upgrading your current hosting plan. This analysis will help you make an informed decision on the best course of action to take.

If there is no space in webhosting what should we do?
Software Development Company