Quote:
Originally Posted by photon
Using the popular tube theory of Internets, if bandwidth is water, the size of the tube dictates how much water you can get. The way the industry works is you can either get water at VERY high speeds but pay per gallon, or you can get water at a lower speed (narrow tube) but not have to worry about how much water you get, unlimited water, as much as you can suck through your tube.
|
Going with your example:
Lets say we do go for a *huge* pipe (which costs a lot more money). Most of the time, all we would have is a little trickle of water and our server has no problem drinking it all up. It rarely breaks a sweat.
Today, it would have been like putting a garden hose in the server's mouth and then turning it on full blast. There comes a point where the server can only handle so many requests per second. We reached that point a few times today even with the modest increase in bandwidth.
So really it comes down to this: The current server and bandwidth allotment is more than adequate 99% of the time. Is it worth increasing monthly hardware and hosting costs by a factor of 3-4 so that things don't slow down 1% of the time?