up vote 0 down vote favorite
share [g+] share [fb]

I'm planning to host a website. I'm assuming, with time, I may have 100,000 users 2-5% would be online at a time.

I'm planning to go for postgresql.

The data I'm expecting that users will upload will be binary files including photographs mostly and limited character texts.

Assuming 2000 users online and 1000 users uploading photographs and exchanging text messages what should be the server configuration should I need. I'm planning to take a static IP and buy own servers as of now.

Please comment, as I do not have much knowledge about web stuff. I can do it on a computer on a tomcat webserver, but how is it done at large scale, please advise.

Please comment of the decision of PostgreSql. What if number of users increased to more than expected, and things like that

link|improve this question
It would take me at least a couple of days work to model the workload then probably 2 more to work on the architecture, and I'd need a lot more information than you've provided. And you expect me to teach you how to do all this yourself in a short post here, starting from the point of "not have much knowledge about web stuff". Couldn't you try something simpler like brain surgery or building moon rockets? – symcbean May 5 '11 at 12:29
As above - you want to build a web architecture that can serve 2000 simultaneous users and "do not have much knowledge about web stuff"? Why are you asking about databases specifically? – growse May 5 '11 at 12:33
@growse: Yeah web stuff, I mean distributed architecture and new technologies like NoSql and stuff. Well, I need an efficient database for fast lookup, but which should be scaleable. I don't know if postgresql is a fine choice. I'm fine with partition DBs to different tables and make them monitored by instances of diiferent DBs under different server hardwares. What I need is a not very accurate answer like: Start with intel xeon quad core it will support X number of users for photo uploads and simple texts or something like that. – Mayank May 5 '11 at 12:43
feedback

closed as not a real question by gWaldo, symcbean, jscott, Graeme Donaldson, Ben Pilbrow May 5 '11 at 12:48

It's difficult to tell what is being asked here. This question is ambiguous, vague, incomplete, overly broad, or rhetorical and cannot be reasonably answered in its current form. See the FAQ for guidance on how to improve it.

1 Answer

up vote 1 down vote

Kind of sounds similar to the load of the dutch site tweakers.net, and they have a rack full of load balancers, failover nodes, SAN storage, database replication, etc. I don't know if you're going to make it with one machine... And if you don't know much about web stuff, you may be out of your league.

link|improve this answer
Well, I'm not going to host facebook. Its website with 0 users. It would take time for anybody to start thinking of registering with a new website. I think for coming 6 months I can host it with an instance of MySql, tomcat and may be an Intel Xeon. Rest will be done with time. – Mayank May 5 '11 at 12:39
feedback

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.