Amazon S3是否适合提供视频? [英] Is Amazon S3 appropriate for serving videos?

问题描述

我正在一个主要功能是播放视频的网站上工作，通常是一个接一个地播放视频.

I'm working on a website with a primary function of playing videos, typically one right after another.

存储MP4和MP4是否合适? Amazon S3上的WebW文件，然后使用HTML5/Flash完成播放?

通过Amazon S3提供视频是否会对速度产生影响?还是我最好从用于运行该站点的同一Amazon EC2服务器上提供视频?

Are there any speed repercussions with serving videos via Amazon S3? Or would I be better off serving the videos from the same Amazon EC2 server I'm using to run the site?

真的，我在寻找优点/缺点.谢谢.

推荐答案

我无法想象使用Amazon进行流式传输.老实说，这种应用的流量成本太高了. 无论如何，如果您仍然想使用它，S3似乎不是一个好选择，因为它是为例如归档而不是流式传输，它具有每秒请求数量以及并发性的限制. 对于流式传输，您需要尽可能快的存储，并且任何Amazon服务都与之相距甚远，绝对是S3，对于EBS而言，它也不是太快. 您可以考虑具有SSD驱动器和正常带宽价格的服务器. 我自己有10个流服务器，每天要处理100TB的流量，每个服务器都有8个SSD驱动器和10Gbps接口，以及64GB的RAM和16个内核.

I cant imagine using Amazon for streaming. Honestly, their traffic costs are way too high for this kind of application. Anyway, if you still want to use it, S3 doesnt seem to be good option, because it's cluster storage designed for e.g. archiving and not streaming, it has limitations of number of requests per second as well it's concurrency. For streaming, you need the fastest possible storage, and any of the Amazon services is far away from that, definetely S3 and for EBS, it's not too fast either. You can consider servers with SSD drives and normal bandwidth prices. I have myself 10 streaming servers doing 100TB of traffic per day, each with 8x SSD drives and 10Gbps interface plus 64GB of RAM and 16 cores.

这篇关于Amazon S3是否适合提供视频?的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！