SMFHacks.com

SMF Gallery Pro => Support => Feature Requests => Topic started by: jingaling on January 11, 2016, 07:19:33 am

Title: Remote Storage?
Post by: jingaling on January 11, 2016, 07:19:33 am
I'm looking at purchasing the pro version of "Gallery" for my forums. However, I was wondering, is there an option to store the uploaded images externally? Such as an FTP server, Google Drive, or Dropbox for example? I'd really rather store the images elsewhere to offset the load on my server.

If not, is there a plan to add this feature in the near future?

Thanks,

Jing
Title: Re: Remote Storage?
Post by: SMFHacks on January 11, 2016, 08:07:57 am
No there is no option for remote storage. I do not currently have any plans for it mainly because storage space shouldn't be an issue nowadays.
Title: Re: Remote Storage?
Post by: jingaling on January 11, 2016, 08:21:49 am
Really? If you have 3,000 users, and all of them upload 10 images that are 500k each that would 15GB gone. As the site grows, and as more people upload more images, that's going to become more and more of a problem.

However, it's more bandwidth than storage space that I'm concerned about. Most VPS providers give a finite limit on the amount of bandwidth you get per month. With a lot of users uploading and downloading images, this can easily be swallowed up.

Yes, there are cheap shared hosting providers that give unlimited storage and unlimited bandwidth, but these aren't good enough for a large forum.
Title: Re: Remote Storage?
Post by: SMFHacks on January 11, 2016, 08:26:41 am
Yes that would be the case but i have not seen a gallery get that big yet. If it becomes an issue that is something I could look into doing. I would more than likely do amazon s3 for remote storage as I have worked with that in the past. The thing though if you are going to use an external site/service to host the images at that point wouldn't it just make more sense to upgrade the server/vps though?
Title: Re: Remote Storage?
Post by: jingaling on January 12, 2016, 03:04:12 am
There's differing opinions on it. Personally, I prefer to offload things like large amounts of images to another server/service. S3 would be perfect for something like this. I've used it myself, and their bandwidth charges are a fraction of what most VPS providers charge. So in my opinion, upgrading a whole server just for a bit more storage is a little pointless.

If you did implement S3, I would absolutely use it.

Thanks for coming back to me.
Title: Re: Remote Storage?
Post by: Kardamilas on April 17, 2016, 10:17:34 pm
Goodmorning to all

My name is Lambros.(as this is my first post,I should introduce myself :) )
Sorry to bring this up but I have the same concerns with
Jingaling...
We have a motorcycle club and we organize at least 1 trip/month.
At least 200 photos/trip since 2004...we are building our private nas
to keep all these photos together and if the pro version could be linked
with our storage we would happily buy it.

Please inform us if you planning something like that.
Thanks for your time.

Regards
Kardamilas Lambros
Title: Re: Remote Storage?
Post by: SMFHacks on April 17, 2016, 10:19:56 pm
Not planning on doing remote storage causes too many issues and storage is cheap nowadays.