Server Fault is a question and answer site for system and network administrators. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Affordable alternative to Linode.

I am using linode to serve my web application. The application serves, what I consider big data using ~ 30GB for our model US State and we serve a few hundred clients each day.

We are unable to expand with linode.

Linode is very quickly becoming completely unaffordable and I would like to learn about hosting alternatives. How do you host your big data?

Should I:

  • Buy my own server?
  • Lease a dedicated server?
  • Use a third party such as AWS?

As a hypothetical lets say, I would like to add data from every US state so 30GB * 50

What factors should I consider and what could I expect to pay using your preferred method?

share|improve this question

closed as not a real question by Ward, womble, Wesley, Khaled, Iain Apr 7 '12 at 7:51

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. For help clarifying this question so that it can be reopened, visit the help center.If this question can be reworded to fit the rules in the help center, please edit the question.

30GB doesn't even come close to being "bigdata" (which is a wank term to begin with). 30TB or more might start to qualify as a large data set, depending on what it is and how it's accessed/manipulated.

The costs you're hitting with Linode are the same sorts of things you're going to get at any provider which has a business model that doesn't fit your requirements, with one-size-fits-all plans. It's the nature of the beast -- poor vendor selection will never begat good results.

I'm not going to try and recommend a specific provider, or a specific technology choice, because (a) we don't do shopping questions, and (b) there isn't remotely enough information to answer that.

I will, however, say that the way I hosted my biggest data set (~15TB of very precious data being accessed and updated heavily by a million or so users at random) involved a large number of physical machines with a lot of fast disks, a lot of data replication, and a quite considerable quantity of money. Cheap out on this stuff and things will not go well.

share|improve this answer

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