New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
@fayaz90 @bgerard @eris @IHA_User
Guys, I am going to make a platform like Netflix, Hulu, Prime. NOT going to make a pirated content platform .
I think you misunderstood the term "Netflix Clone".
Clone here means "Netflix Concept Clone" NOT "Netflix Content Clone".
We will design the platform and resale them to other companies who want to start a Netflix like company
So, DMCA is not a concern
okay got it...
IDrive e2 is just $4/TB/month and has been working great for me. Definitely the most affordable offer that I was able to find and the service suits my needs
Only if you stream less then 3x your disk usage...
Otherwise you are going to pay top dolar ...
I find it interesting that you recommend IDrive e2 in every single one of your posts.
Yeah, if DMCA is a problem he'd need to at least take additional precautions or pretty much any common solution will just boot him in no time.
I also don't see why he's so fixated on object storage. If he'd be a little flexible in that regard he'd have a lot more options. Hell, he could even just build some raid0/LVM/JBOD setup from Hetzner's storage boxes and expand as needed by adding more boxes. Reverse proxy in front if he feels he'll get complaints and he's pretty much golden. Sure that's somewhat simplified and some details would have to be worked out, still it's not exactly rocket science.
The key idea here is that it's perfectly possible to fill the whole storage box with a single file and use it to create a loop device which then functions like any other random disk device. I guess he wouldn't even run into problems mounting the result using multiple VMs/dedis (to increase outbound bandwidth), since as long as there's just a single instance writing to the construct (probably his administration VM) i don't see why locking would be an issue, so it's basically
mount -o roon all slaves and there shouldn't be a problem. With a bit of clever logic slaves could also act as caches reducing the load put on the storage backend.Basically this would likely work for any kind of storage as long as he'd manage to expose some kind of device over the network.
For me, the appeal of object storage is the ability to pull files into memory or read partial bits of files without having to mount filesystems or even touch the filesystem on the compute machine. OP could even use tiered storage to offload lesser streamed content to a self hosted s3 cluster whilst keeping hot stuff on R2 so they can scale without bandwidth limits on the storage machine - all via the same S3 API.
But yes, the storage aspect of this system feels like it's not the most complicated aspect.
what content are you planning to put on it ?
Probably CCM (cute cat media).
Only the first month. The cost over a year, no. After 1 year that storage is free.
Where do you see that? I see £60 /month, and no mention of anything getting cheaper. Or do I misunderstand you somehow?
@totally_not_banned
Great answer. I think Hetnezer looks good. It costs $2.6 per TB.
I think it's good.
@Void
It's same like how Netflix puts it's content. Like they will produce a web series and buy it and stream it to the viewers.
In the same way, we will develop a OTT platform and resale to businesses. Like if you want to start a Netflix like company and need a web platform, you can get it from us.
@bgerard
The Gorila servers cost seems when comparing their config like dual powerful CPUs , 128 GB RAM and 504 TB (36x14TB) storage for $600 !
I think , in future we can host the entire transcoding platform in it which will reduce cost.
Great suggestion.
@totally_not_banned
One question. Does Hetzner Storage Box works as a server's backend as per their ToS ?
No you will need to have VPS / Server infront of it.
Also download speeds can be terrible at some times
So you won’t develop content but only the platform? Like OTTaaS
I wouldn't know why not but then i use it mostly for backups. Better check yourself but i'd be surprised if there was any actual limits to what you can do with it.
Never experienced that but then again i don't use it like 24/7. Might be best to run a couple short term test then and see how it performs, i guess. What kind of protocol did you use by the way?
SFTP Uploads goes usually fine downloads are a bit slower won't suggest using it for a storage backend ...
For my needs it is fast enough but downloading / streaming videos from it is a simple no go...
I'm a bit surprised there. Not that i usually pay a lot of attention to the speed but from what i remember i could pretty much push towards saturating the link. Obviously not 100MB/s but in that direction - been a while but i was kinda impressed back then (realistically probably something around 60-80MB/s). I'm using a wacky setup with a loop mounted file over SMB though, so maybe that plays into it. Even with those speeds i'd still strongly suggest to think about some kind of caching strategy though.
(file with 100% size of storage box, box mounted as cifs, file mapped to loop device, loop device ext4/xfs formated and mounted like a regular disk)
I am perhaps Hetzner's biggest fan but I strongly recommend against using their storage boxes for this. There is a limit to the connections you can establish and anyway performance is not stable at all from my long experience with them. I even used them as storage backend for Plex for personal use a while ago (before discovering RealDebrid) and even for a single user performance was a hit or miss depending on the streaming quality. That storage is fine for archiving data and backups, not for stuff that requires some decent level of performance IMO. Object storage also will have problems regardless of how you use it. I think that if you are serious about building such a platform the best way route is to go with a fleet of dedicated servers with plenty of storage.
I am curious about one thing, a bit off topic but related to the kind of service you are building: have you thought about a robust way of limit the number of devices a single account can stream for? I am asking because as bug bounty hunter I made quite nice cash discovering critical bugs in this area for two of the largest streaming services in the market. In the worst case I was able to stream from unlimited devices from a single account an I didn't even need to authenticate for it to work
It was quite complex because I had to chain three vulnerabilities together but they paid the max reward treating the issue as critical since it was a big risk for the platform to lose a lot of money if such an exploit were to be leaked by an malicious party. So yeah, I recommend you devise a robust mechanism to prevent this kind of abuse.
Your request is weird.
100TB is crazy high amount for legal VoD.
One VoD site that I manage makes ~$15,000/mo from sales. Theres hundreds of movies/shorts and all of it weights 3TB. All videos are available in 480p, 720p, 1080p and 2160p.
I can save maybe $20/mo if I host it on some random storage VPS with MinIO and then waste time managing it, migrating it when I use all space and have "trust me bro" data durability and availability.
You want to host 100TB of legal content on cheapest service you'll find so you will save 0.1% of total costs? Where are your questions about availability? Where is your SLA requirement?
People are not dumb to pay $5-$10 for TB of storage when there are $1-$2 dedicated servers. To get the same durability you need cluster of these dedicated servers, to have the same availability you need DevOps person to manage, at least $3000/mo.
Its very bad idea to use anything else than "premium" object storage such as Backblaze B2 at your scale. You wont reach storage limits, data will be always available, they wont get hacked.
Place couple of VPSes in front of it for cache and reduced egress cost. This is most cost effective way to run your VoD business.
You are not pirate who will lose $5 if he needs to reupload thing. You will lose your possible contract from new customer or you will pay for unavailability to current customer.
hmm, deep pocket,
good point
can i get subscription. i love watching..!?
Well, it's not like you'd need more than a single (or a handful) connection anyways? Also once you treat them as actual devices you have options. You can basically raid0/LVM the things but i figure that might be a little too exotic for most people even if it's really dead simple. It's certainly not an out of the box experience though.
@AXYZE
Well.. How are you encoding...?
We calculated like this ...
A web series has on average 3 seasons and each has 8 episodes, so 24 episodes
We downloaded a '4K Ultra quality BDrip' of a web series which has 3 seasons and 8 episodes per season for testing purpose.
It has each episodes with 5 GB size.
Then we used FFmpeg to create M3U8 HLS streams for it with 480p, 720p, 1080p, 2160p.
The final HLS folder of a single episode is 15GB. So 15 x 8 ep x 3 seas = 360 GB for a whole series
So, 3 series fit into 1 TB approx.
So, thought like, if our client has 300 series with movies then it should easily reach 100 TB.
That's why I asked 100TB. Also I need something future proof.
But you told just 3TB for hundereds of movies. How? What is the size of each quality ?
I worked in the past for a company and it had about 30TB in storage and it was stored in .mp4 only and with a lot less video sizes...
So for full fledged videos in 4k format in HLS and it doesn't surprise me that is needs to have 100TB
Also the topic starter doesn't need to explain why it needs so much storage and only aks where to get a lot of storage on the cheap...
How ever I still think Storage box is not the way to go.
And if you don't have the knowledge go with S3 / other kind of storage provider...
"Our" system worked with S3 storage backend (https://ceph.io/en/) with multiple server around Europe and doing +/- 2 to 4 Gbit "peak day" moments. And +/- 15 Gbit at "Peak"
We paid about 2dollar / TB how ever I don't think that company offers it publicly and as is was 5 years ago I am sure the prices have been rising a lot...
If you have a storage for $10 / TB / Month you still only pay 1000 dollar for 100TB and if you have then free egress it is probably still cheaper than what we paid with traffic (not free at that moment $2,5 / TB in overusage probally and slightly better when prepaid...
And If you do 500 TB in traffic at moments. Even you are now probably possible to get a lot better bandwidth deals for 10gbit connections...
And if you go the storage route you still need:
2 servers to mirror each other if a server is allready 300 dollar / month you need to have a least 2 with the same specs...
(And even maybe 3 because what happens if you load parity between both of them?
So a 2 dollar / TB becomes allready 4 or 6 dollar / TB deal
I don't see why It is cheaper to self host ..
r u related?
No ..