How much upload speed do I need for a Web server?

Devin McCloud · January 2009

I want to run a web server from my home. Hypothetical situation...Windows server 2003 with 4 gb of memory and single website. I have a 3mbps download and a 300 kbps upload(I know 300 is low). So if my home page is 37.5 KB, does that mean that I can only server up one page a second? Considering there are 37.5 KB in 300kbps. With that said, if 1000 people hit my site at the same time, does this mean the 1000th person would receive their page 1000 seconds later?
Can someone clarify this, I am having trouble understanding this concept. If so what is a good upload speed for a site to serve fast page views if say someone posted my site on digg or youtube.

kalebksp · January 2009

Devin McCloud wrote: »

With that said, if 1000 people hit my site at the same time, does this mean the 1000th person would receive their page 1000 seconds later?

Nope, if 1000 people hit your home web server at the same time they would likely all timeout. Just the number of concurrent connections would likely cause problems for your router.

Devin McCloud wrote: »

Can someone clarify this, I am having trouble understanding this concept. If so what is a good upload speed for a site to serve fast page views if say someone posted my site on digg or youtube.

If your site were to be posted on digg no one would be able to access it, and you would be unable to access the internet. You need a real web hosting provider (and a good one at that) to survive being posted to digg. It would basically be a DDOS on your connection.

Hosting a home web server with a regular home internet connections is fine if a couple people are going to view it. Anymore than that and you need to pay someone to host your site.

the_Grinch · January 2009

Also check your terms of service as you might not be allowed to host a webserver on your connection.

dynamik · January 2009

You'll need to get a "real" host if you're expecting traffic from Digg. Budget hosts will crumble under the load.

JavonR · January 2009

the_Grinch wrote: »

Also check your terms of service as you might not be allowed to host a webserver on your connection.

I second that, most ISP's will flip a brick if they find out you have a web server

.

Mmartin_47 · January 2009

JavonR wrote: »

I second that, most ISP's will flip a brick if they find out you have a web server .

Yeah I heard with Comcast especially, they monitor and watch for excessive bandwidth abuse.

Devin McCloud · January 2009

Thanks for the response.

You'll need to get a "real" host if you're expecting traffic from Digg. Budget hosts will crumble under the load.

What is a real good upload speed. Can you clarify ....1Mbps, 3mbps upload or what? I need to know what to ask for as a service plan.

Also check your terms of service as you might not be allowed to host a webserver on your connection.

I did this before posting and my isp has no problem with me running a website from my home.

Like I said before I want to run it from my home without a hosting company, what kinda of speed do I need for upload to handle that kind of load on a web server?

dynamik · January 2009

It's impossible to answer that with what you've given us. What type of content are you going to be hosting? You can range from static HTML files with no images to full-blown video. What about memory or CPU requirements? Again, are these going to be static pages or database-drive pages that have a lot of processing behind them.

What's the typical timeout for browsers? 15 seconds? 30 seconds? Take your average page size and your available bandwidth and see how many people you can serve in that time period.

Devin McCloud · January 2009

dynamik, I was just looking for a ball park figure for a html static page with no flash (37kb). I will probably be running asp.net and sql 2000 in the future...but for now just html. I am just trying to figure out a budget on what it might cost to start up and whether it is worth it for a business line for my home. My servers hold 16gb gb memory and are dual Xeon 2.8 processors running Windows 2003 server. I will start out with one server.

The whole point was to figure out what I need before I sign a year contract and agree to a business line.

tiersten · January 2009

The answer is still no. Don't try to host it at home. A connection capable of withstanding the heavy traffic caused by being a popular item on Digg will be extremely expensive.

Most DSL and cable offerings from ISPs don't have a SLA even if they are classed as a "business" line.

JavonR · January 2009

I'm going to have to agree on this one as well. You can get an amazing hosting plan which can be located at an enterprise level data center for 15 bucks a month. Not to mention full admin rights etc. why even bother hosting at home for very sub par performance?

If you are still serious about doing it at home I would recommend getting between a 3-5mb upload, which is very difficult if not impossible to get out of a standard cable modem or dsl line. - again, this is just not smart.

Pash · January 2009

http://www.eleven2.com/hosting/

Used them for the last 12 months, been alright so far and got a good deal at the time for the annual signup. They have a new years offering by using coupon code "newyear". By the way, I am not saying this is the only offering out there, there are literally thousands as you may have already seen!

As others have said getting a "business" line at home still probably wont get the sort of service you will need. Even shared services with a host provider is better suited I feel.

The logistics of backups can be a problem as well, if you start hosting databases and the likes on your webserver.

Even if you decided to pay a company for your own dedicated box hosted in a data centre this would probably be more suited.

Anyway, when you weigh all the options up: expected user traffic, cost, uptime, backups and continuity plans you will have your answer.

Devin McCloud · January 2009

Well thanks for all the advice. I am a little disappointed considering Mark Frind of plentyoffish dating site gets 500 million page views a month and runs his servers out of his own home. Maybe his story is made up. I don't know. I kinda had the pipe dream that it could be done successfully from my house with my servers and a business line. I guess tomorrow I will call my isp and just see what their upload speed and cost is for these lines.

Pash · January 2009

Devin McCloud wrote: »

Well thanks for all the advice. I am a little disappointed considering Mark Frind of plentyoffish dating site gets 500 million page views a month and runs his servers out of his own home. Maybe his story is made up. I don't know. I kinda had the pipe dream that it could be done successfully from my house with my servers and a business line. I guess tomorrow I will call my isp and just see what their upload speed and cost is for these lines.

Ohh its entirely possible he has/is doing that. However, you have to weight up the above thing's like I said. Do you wan't the hassles that are involved with hosting your own web server? I forgot to add power and availability to the list above I think. Having an always on box is gonna cost you, probably more than what the data centre companies will charge for shared servers.

astorrs · January 2009

Devin McCloud wrote: »

Well thanks for all the advice. I am a little disappointed considering Mark Frind of plentyoffish dating site gets 500 million page views a month and runs his servers out of his own home. Maybe his story is made up. I don't know. I kinda had the pipe dream that it could be done successfully from my house with my servers and a business line. I guess tomorrow I will call my isp and just see what their upload speed and cost is for these lines.

He may have started it that way but it's not anymore - there are SysAdmin job openings for PlentyofFish in Vancouver right now and I can't imagine they're expected to work out of his laundry room.

Update: Just confirmed with someone, they use Peer1 in Vancouver for a co-lo.

Now for anyone looking for a job: http://vancouver.en.craigslist.ca/sad/973179846.html

(I was tempted to apply a few months ago, but it's not really what I enjoy doing - it would be a fun challenge though!).

Nobylspoon · January 2009

Bluehost.com is great, I just renewed another 12 months with them. Its a little less than $100 for a year with domain included. I mainly just use it for email now, I want to put up a new site but I haven't decided what I want to do.

Mishra · January 2009

I'm under the impression that Devin is just over planning here.

Devin,

Depending on what you are doing, it is definitely a good idea to start out a web site in your own home because you can save months of hosting costs as you tweek your website and actually start getting visitors. This is all dependent on the ISP's tolerance. Most of them won't even let you have port 80 to your house. Once you have gotten a solid client base you are going to need to move it to a hosting site. This is due to all the reasons people stated above.

I wouldn't worry about upload speeds at home as you won't get any kind of traffic no matter what you are doing. (unless you are like serving warez lol).

I just don't want people to discourage you from hosting at home in the beginning stages because it is a good move. But once you start getting some real traffic then you can move it. It is a good idea to do it this way because most websites don't get any kind of significant traffic and flop before it has a user base. So why pay hosting fees if your site doesn't do anything for 1.5 years?

Devin McCloud · January 2009

Now for anyone looking for a job: Senior Systems Administrator

Thanks for that post. He has come a long way from 500 million page views to 2 billion a month. Wow ... imagine all that ad revenue generated from his site.

kalebksp · January 2009

I agree with Mishra. There is no reason you couldn't start out hosting your website from your home. I would highly advise that you have a static IP for your connection and that your home connection is stable (no frequent outages from your ISP). I believe that outages can affect google rankings.

I am curious as to why your are so set on running it from home. Not trying to dissuade you from doing so, just wondering if you have a particular reason for doing so.

Good luck!

astorrs · January 2009

Mishra/kalebksp, I can't agree with you guys. Given that hosting packages sufficient for a "starter" can be picked up for ~$5-8/mo (think Hostmonster, etc) and most ISPs charge you at least that for a static IP (if they even allow it without upgrading to SOHO/SMB plans) to me the numbers just don't add up.

dynamik · January 2009

astorrs wrote: »

Mishra/kalebksp, I can't agree with you guys. Given that hosting packages sufficient for a "starter" can be picked up for ~$5-8/mo (think Hostmonster, etc) and most ISPs charge you at least that for a static IP (if they even allow it without upgrading to SOHO/SMB plans) to me the numbers just don't add up.

+1

The only reason I'd try a site from home is if I wanted to get some experience managing a web server (i.e. setting up firewall rules, observing attacks, differentiating regular and irregular activity, etc.). That would have to be the primary focus though; any serious site would get hosted by the people who know what they're doing and have the infrastructure to support it.

kalebksp · January 2009

astorrs wrote: »

Mishra/kalebksp, I can't agree with you guys. Given that hosting packages sufficient for a "starter" can be picked up for ~$5-8/mo (think Hostmonster, etc) and most ISPs charge you at least that for a static IP (if they even allow it without upgrading to SOHO/SMB plans) to me the numbers just don't add up.

I said that there wasn't a reason he couldn't do it, I didn't say that I recommended doing so. I host my web server with a hosting company because I know it is a PITA doing it from home, but if he's dead set on doing so there is no real reason he can't.

Mishra · January 2009

Well of course if you don't have any interest in learning the web server itself then you should definitely not start it at home. I assume anyone on this board interested in having a website at home would be also getting a learning experience as well.

You also don't need a static IP. Register your IP at dyndns.org and get a router that is configurable with dynamic DNS. Buy your domain name and use a CNAME to your dyndns name. You are good to go.

It's 2 birds with 1 stone. You get the experience and cost savings. And you make sure website isn't a flop before you put any money into it.

Devin McCloud · January 2009

Mishra & kalebksp, thanks for the encouraging words. I will take that advice and try it from my home.

Why would I want to run it from my home?

1: Utilities are paid in my rental agreement.
2: I already have the equipment
3: I want to learn how to manage a server a run clustered servers
4: I already have a cable connection
5: my ISP allows it
6: I have a static IP

Well of course if you don't have any interest in learning the web server itself then you should definitely not start it at home. I assume anyone on this board interested in having a website at home would be also getting a learning experience as well.

Exactly, what's the point of being in computers if you don't try to absorb as much as you can. Well put Mishra!

Given that hosting packages sufficient for a "starter" can be picked up for ~$5-8/mo

What do you really get with a $5 or a $15 hosting package? Is it really any better then my 300K upload cable connection? Don't they cap those connections and limit the bandwidth per month. If someone has one of these connections I would love to run Microsoft's free web site load tester on it to see what it is really worth.

I called around and a business line runs $95 for 20mbps down and 1Mb upload. Another option is $195 for 20Mbps down and 1.5 Mbps upload. My goal was to test adsense and try take a CSS purist attempt at creating a lite weight site and testing it. Mishra I think your right on, it can't hurt and in the process I learn a lot of experience and what it takes to manage and protect a site. I also don't have to pay for anything but a domain name. I can always move up to a higher connection down the road.

tiersten · January 2009

Devin McCloud wrote: »

What do you really get with a $5 or a $15 hosting package? Is it really any better then my 300K upload cable connection?

Yes.

Devin McCloud wrote: »

Don't they cap those connections and limit the bandwidth per month.

They measure the amount that is uploaded/downloaded. This means if your traffic comes and goes in bursts then it'll still be under the limit. If it suddenly got busy with your 300Kbps line then it'll get overloaded.

Devin McCloud wrote: »

I called around and a business line runs $95 for 20mbps down and 1Mb upload. Another option is $195 for 20Mbps down and 1.5 Mbps upload.

1.5Mbps still isn't a huge amount. 1 person with a slow DSL line can saturate your link by themselves.

Devin McCloud wrote: »

My goal was to test adsense and try take a CSS purist attempt at creating a lite weight site and testing it. Mishra I think your right on, it can't hurt and in the process I learn a lot of experience and what it takes to manage and protect a site. I also don't have to pay for anything but a domain name. I can always move up to a higher connection down the road.

If you just want to have a play and make a small site to just get the hang of things then what you want to do is fine. We're just saying don't expect to be able to run anything big off your cable line.

kalebksp · January 2009

Fair enough.

I do have a $15/month host, which includes 100MB connection, 500GB transfer, and root access to the VPS. It's an unmanaged plan, so I configure the firewall and do all the system administration. It's like having the freedom of a home server with better uptime and speed. YMMV with uptime and speed, of course. I tend to always be screwing with my home network and my ISP is not always the greatest.

I don't really want people running stress testing tools against my server, but if you point me to the tool you're talking about I'd be happy to run it. I'd be interested to see the comparison myself.

Good luck, and welcome to the exciting world of web hosting!

Slightly off topic:

When you do register you're domain name, if you want reliable email for it I'm a big fan of the free Google Apps for Business. You can run your own email server if you want, but that's more complicated because of anti-spam mechanisms, especially since your ISP likely won't have a reverse lookup DNS entry for your IP address pointing to your domain name.

astorrs · January 2009

kalebksp wrote: »

I don't really want people running stress testing tools against my server, but if you point me to the tool you're talking about I'd be happy to run it. I'd be interested to see the comparison myself

Me too. I've got a couple of web hosts right now and would love to see what I can pull from each.

Mishra · January 2009

Devin McCloud wrote: »

I called around and a business line runs $95 for 20mbps down and 1Mb upload. Another option is $195 for 20Mbps down and 1.5 Mbps upload.

I would just like to restate that if you make a website and actually start getting steady traffic then I do suggest you move it to a hosting provider. But in the mean time you can develop at home and start your website off the ground.

Good luck.

Devin McCloud · January 2009

Well I guess I was mistaken. A few years back I used a free Microsoft tool to stress test asp.net applications on a web server. After reinstalling it, it doesn't look like it can be used remotely.

The Microsoft WAS web stress tool is designed to realistically simulate multiple browsers requesting pages from a web site. You can use this tool to gather performance and stability information about your web application. This tool simulates a large number of requests with a relatively small number of client machines. The goal is to create an environment that is as close to production as possible so that you can find and eliminate problems in the web application prior to deployment.

Download details: Web Application Stress Tool

I did a google search and it look like there are companies offering services to stress test your web site for a price.

Willshire86 · August 2009

JavonR wrote: »

If you are still serious about doing it at home I would recommend getting between a 3-5mb upload, which is very difficult if not impossible to get out of a standard cable modem or dsl line. - again, this is just not smart.

it is not remotely at all impossible to get 3-5mbps up speed. In fact I was just talking to my isp the other day and you could get up to 10mbps. in theory, you could get an up speed equal to your down speed. in fact, with an actual business account, I'm sure you can get more up speed than you would need. But of course as most other people, I am here searching possibilities and price ranges.

Willshire86 · August 2009

astorrs wrote: »

Mishra/kalebksp, I can't agree with you guys. Given that hosting packages sufficient for a "starter" can be picked up for ~$5-8/mo (think Hostmonster, etc) and most ISPs charge you at least that for a static IP (if they even allow it without upgrading to SOHO/SMB plans) to me the numbers just don't add up.

I have a static IP and I sure as **** don't pay extra.

How much upload speed do I need for a Web server?

Comments