Bandwidth Usage - What Counts and What Doesnt?

spasticdonkey · Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 3:12 pm

In laying out our site I tried to be kind to RWH resources, and of course our bandwidth limit. Had a couple questions..

A media player embeded via IFRAME, with the IFRAME source page hosted on another host, does this count against my RWH bandwidth?

Images drawn from other sites, such as a member with an image forum sig hosted somewhere else... does this count against my RWH bandwidth?

Thanks Smile

persona_non_grata · Joined: Posts: 0

no , the address where whatever is stored pays for the bandwidth.
so using media or images that are stored on another address will not be counted via your raven hosting account.

spasticdonkey · Posted: Mon May 07, 2007 4:52 pm

cool thats what i thought it would do, but had to make sure Smile

persona_non_grata · Joined: Posts: 0

but with the usage of spanel you can keep an eye on things very easy,especially the bandwith..
even upto directories and pages.

Raven · Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 9:13 am

Just for clarification, bandwidth usage is calculated on all data transfered from and to your site. In other words anything your account has to do to handle traffic/requests is counted as your bandwidth.

persona_non_grata · Joined: Posts: 0

huh...
thats confusing raven... Wink

the sample spasticdonkey gave is like.....if he publishes a page with an iframe that shows whatever....

it can be done the same with the current youtube blocks or whatever...
we play them but we dont host the movie...
thats why youtube costs 1.000.000 a month... Laughing

Raven · Posted: Fri May 11, 2007 10:36 pm

Sorry if it's confusing but it's true. Any traffic between your site and anyone else's site is accountable bandwidth. In the case of an IFRAME you are just linking to some else's site for the content so that is not accountable to you.

spasticdonkey · Posted: Mon May 14, 2007 11:40 pm

Good to hear about Iframe....

I have a header that is heavily diced and contains 30+ images.. I draw these from another host, am I achieving anything by doing this? At least reducing server load and requests (and improving performance) to my RWH account?

persona_non_grata · Joined: Posts: 0

Quote:

I have a header that is heavily diced and contains 30+ images.. I draw these from another host, am I achieving anything by doing this? At least reducing server load and requests (and improving performance) to my RWH account?

no....

Raven · Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 6:21 am

persona_non_grata is correct. In all probability you actually are slowing down your site. If you had the images stored locally, that is [almost always] faster. By pulling the images from another site/host you do not incur the bandwidth hit. Obviously if you store the images on your host you will take the bandwidth hit.

Raven note: I modified my previous reply because I did not state it clearly. It was early and I was still typing with my eyes closed Wink

montego · Posted: Tue May 15, 2007 6:40 am

I guess I am not understanding this then. The browser is pulling the images from two separate sites, the HTML source from RWH and the images from some other host. So, from a bandwidth perspective, wouldn't they be coming from two different hosts?

evaders99 · Moderator Joined: Apr 30, 2004 Posts: 2852

It would be two different hosts. The HTML file would count from the bandwidth on RWH, the images on the external host would not. It would save your RWH bandwidth, but it could make loading slower because the browser has to initiate a seperate file request for those images.

Some sites do use dedicated image servers, just because of the bandwidth issues.

persona_non_grata · Joined: Posts: 0

but were talking about a few images of a few hundred bytes.
pulling that from another address to "save" something is useless..
when the storage address isnt available,to busy,times out or whatever reason why it cant serv the images it slows your site performance..

evaders99 · Moderator Joined: Apr 30, 2004 Posts: 2852

I personally agree, the scale of the images is too small to really consider such bandwidth issues (unless you're hosting high quality photo images). I would say its something else takes your bandwidth.. media files, downloads, etc.