Can a gallery site handle the traffic on shared?

[Ruriko]

Let's say I run a gallery site that is powered in php with no mysql required. Can a shared host handle traffic that receives 50k+ hits daily?

I know a shared host can handle 50k+ hits daily if the site is pure html but I'm not sure if that still applies the same for php

[sander k]

That are lots of people, my server can't handle that, I know that from a proxy site I had, it couldn't handle that.
Got a Dual Core 2.5ghz
4GB Ramm.

[abboodeh]

what about VPS?

[LSComputers]

Hello,

This really depends on the host and the type of gallery script. A host may have an connection limit, such as host gator etc., which means you would never be able to host with them on shared space. However if the host has a new machine, you may be able to use it for some time.

In terms of the type of script, it all depends on how it itself deals with the load.

I know this is hosting question section, but let me point you to someone who may be able to help you. http://uptimehost.com/ they are an clustered cloud provider. Its going to be costly in terms of the package you get, however they claim to say your never be suspended and it doesn't matter how large your site is, it will always remain fast.

I have seen the network myself, and I know the internal tests and the tests well in beta, were very promising. However I have not used them since they prepared for the launch.

[~ServerPoint~]

What is web application you are using? What are the size of the images. I believe that knowing that we will be able to calculate everything for you

[314Hosting]

A VPS can fulfill your needs.

[SiberForum]

Let's say I run a gallery site that is powered in php with no mysql required. Can a shared host handle traffic that receives 50k+ hits daily?

I know a shared host can handle 50k+ hits daily if the site is pure html but I'm not sure if that still applies the same for php


You know with some web hosting companies you can test that. So you can test that beforehand. Perhaps there is no need to to go for the VPS
Few test days will allow you to understand if that possible or not possible at all

[wbacky]

I am not sure how many pictures that you have but I hosted my own photo gallery at one point and at a certain point I was unable to upload and more phoos to the script as it just would not work. I think that it was too much for the database. I have since moved over to flickr. I have a pro account and it can handle all my pictures and the traffic. This is just my experiance so I am not sure if you will have the same issues. I had my gallery on a dedicated server I have.

[hostgoza]

no matter how much photos you have, yes , you can host in shared hosting, with good amount of bandwidth.

[Schmarvin]

A mid-level VPS would be good for you if you have doubts. You don't need a dedicated server if its just your site and maybe a few others.

[Razerst]

Off topic:
IMHO uptimehost is not expensive since it has reseller feature and lot of space.

On Topic:
If it's just a simple thumb script and gallery viewer, shared host can do that for you.

[serverorigin]

A VPS can fulfill your needs.

All depends on the VPS specs...

You should be able to host this with a shared provider and in SOME circumstances a VPS would be able to handle that load as well. Many providers sell as low as 100 mhz CPU virtual machines. It all depends on the provider.

[serverorigin]

That are lots of people, my server can't handle that, I know that from a proxy site I had, it couldn't handle that.
Got a Dual Core 2.5ghz
4GB Ramm.

Server isn't configured properly because it should easily handle 50k+ hits a day with dual-core 4GB RAM. I'd recommend having someone tweak Apache/MYSQL as well as the kernel config as you should handle that kind of load easily.

[fcolor]

I don't think that you should count on shared hosting account when you need to welcome 50,000 visitors. I don't think that shared hosting will work fro you.

[vWiz]

I don't think that you should count on shared hosting account when you need to welcome 50,000 visitors. I don't think that shared hosting will work fro you.

Yeah shared hosting would not be able to handle this amount of visitors. I would recommend VPS.

[~ServerPoint~]

Yeah shared hosting would not be able to handle this amount of visitors. I would recommend VPS.

I believe semidedicated (shared hosting) will be able to work on it. But VPS is better in any way

[SiberForum]

I believe semidedicated (shared hosting) will be able to work on it. But VPS is better in any way

I would not recommend semi dedicated. Better know about all limits. I suppose you will be able to find a lot of cheap VPS.

[aloycasmir]

I too would recommend a Vps .
It's better not to risk destabilizing a shared hosting setup with this .
Rather looking for a vps as many have suggested would seem more sensible .
Oh , and if you are looking for one , I do provide very affordable vps solutions too .
Anyways , you still have to decide on having a vps or shared hosting first...
My 2 cents: go for vps

[WebIntellects-R]

Your web site will use server sources and on the shared web hosting there are limits and web host will not allow you to overuse them. But id you have good VPS you know the limits and you do not depend on other customers hosted on the same server.

[~ServerPoint~]

I would not recommend semi dedicated. Better know about all limits. I suppose you will be able to find a lot of cheap VPS.

I know what semidedicated is. That's why I recommended VPS for him instead.

[iBrightDev]

the first question would be is that 50k unique hits, or just 50k hits? also, what kind of BW usage is the site generating?

[glovern]

For 50k unique hits, vps would meet your business hosting requirements. But it depends on your budget. Dedicated server would cost you more. Many web hosts are offering cheap virtual private servers at low prices.

The important things you should consider

-reliability of their sevices
-server uptime guarantee
-24/7 telephonic/live chat customer support
-quality of the customer services


Good luck!

[Jan]

I think the OP had his answer some months ago.