Hosting for 1million traffic

Which is the best hosting site can carry 1million traffic at a time...
I am looking for instant hosting booking...
Please suggest..
Thanks

 

You will need to build a custom solution on top of Amazon cloud services to scale to that level - or have thousands of machines available.

Now to be more realistic - what makes you think that you will have 1 million users at a time? Twitter, for example, handles 600 to 800 requests per second, over 180 server instances. My company, which has over 500k users, averages 200 concurrent users and peaked at 2000 concurrent users. MySpace has an average of 2.3 million concurrent users back in 2009 on 4500 web servers, 1200 cache servers and 500 database servers. So what are the realistic numbers you are trying to accommodate?

 

Yes, you'll need a meshed/clustered setup either cloud or non-cloud. It definitely isn't instant and will take some time to deploy and customize. Cloud may not be suitable if you have heavy disk usage.

We setup a cluster for a client recently that served over a billion page views in a month. This compromised of a SAN, multiple front-end web servers and back-end db servers so the cost was significant.

 

We have shared hosting clients that hit over 1 million visitors. We use a cluster for their DNS requests and memcached to optimize performance.

 

Shared hosting can not ever hit 1 million concurrent users. Apache itself will die at 4000 concurrent requests on a very high end and well tuned machine. Getting nginx to serve 10k concurrents is possible, and Yaws has be proven at 80k concurrent users. And this is in fine tuned systems with highly optimized code with heavy reliance on caching and built to scale from the get-go. Beware of snake oil salesman that say otherwise.

A system to hypothetically manage this kind of traffic will require a dedicated network operations person and should not be outsourced - even if being built in the cloud, you would require an on-staff specialist.

 

@trendint you should rephrase that to say *MOST* Shared hosting can not ever hit 1 million concurrent users. This is because MOST shared hosts have no clue what they are doing, little linux knowledge, nor do they even own any equipment. The proof is in the logs...

 

@phxadam: No, it's technically not possible for a shared hosting environment to handle that concurrently on a single host. That's a pure technical limitation, and requires load balancing over multiple machines to handle even slightly reasonably.

Incoming connections:
A software based load balancer/firewall alone would not be able to handle this and you would need at the least a Juniper NS5200 to handle the minimum of 1mm concurrent connections, but if you want to scale you would need to already plan for double the concurrents and have a Juniper SRX - that's $50k right there in hardware that no hosting provider will give up as a dedicated to a single customer without tacking on an overhead - but let's just say that it was bought used and is a freebie to get the customer to sign with them - still a $25kish investment.

Memory footprint:
You would need approximately 1GB per 20k concurrent network connections of memory available; scaled up to 1mm concurrents you will need 50gb memory footprint overhead. This is not accounting for any possible memory intensive operations the actual application might need - nor any memcache requirements which would be required to smartly scale up an app of this size.

CPU:
You will have approximately 35% to 50% CPU utilization to handle this many concurrents. This does not account for the possibility of the application having CPU bound restrictions.

Disk I/O:
This will be your biggest bottleneck majority of the time. Reducing disk I/O will require more caching, which requires more memory. Even then you have to be concerned about database I/O which will be the biggest consumer of disk I/O. On an optimized machine, with optimized queries, MySQL can run 200k to 300k queries a second. But keep in mind, MySQL also opens 3 file descriptors per connection, and that the queries are memory and CPU bound so those numbers add up.

These are just some quick points on this topic; can you provide a multi-server setup to accommodate this - sure. But not a shared host/VPS. If the proof is in the logs then I would like to be proven wrong - and if that's the case - great. You should then be trying to get MySpace, PlentyOfFish, StackOverflow and other extremely high traffic sites to host with you, because they are obviously doing it wrong.

 

My mistake, I was thinking 1 million hits per month not "1 million traffic at a time".

 

I think you need couple of dedicated servers.

You should try softlayer, they have good network.

 

I think you need VPS or dedicated server for that much of traffic

 

There is no denying the fact that Dedicated server will be the best solution according to your requirements.
I advise you to compare all web hosting services, as it is a top priority for your new web host business to be well-provided with all necessary tools.

 

If you mempuntai 1 million traffic and even a good idea to use a VPS Dedicated.
I think shared hosting will not be able to withstand that much traffic

 

My suggestion if your limit is on budget:

- buy some cheap ($5-10) VPS with at least 512 RAM
- setup nginx
- you will easy handle 100 req/sec.

Ding this on all my high traffic sites, spending costs for thousands...

 

I think another important thing to consider is that if you have a site that serves that kind of traffic, then you should not be relying on a single point of failure as that will cost you revenue. You need redundancy and failover.

My minimum suggested setup for anything with high traffic that needs to be up at all times would be:

Round-robin DNS to two load balancers
Dual webservers that the load balancers switch between
Separate write only database server - with local read only replicated databases on each of the webservers
Memcache pool accross all the machines with the largest pools even being able to live on the load balancers

With this minimum setup you will avoid downtime with hardware failure, you will be able to expand horizontally by adding additional webservers and you can still use commodity hardware. This setup is achievable for under $300 a month and offers at least the first steps in a proper topology that can scale over time.

 

hey,I wud suggest you to go for cloudclaim.com they have good consistency and 24x7 cust. support.You will face no downtime.better try for VPS hosting for such a huge traffic.cloudclaim is reliable too and have fair & cheap hosting plans with them

 

I can't believe that you have grown something enough to know the terms that you are using, but really have no idea where to go from here.
It doesn't make any sense.
Even a noob knows that the kind of numbers that you are claiming needs a custom built solution and yet, you are asking as if you really think it's as easy as signing up for a hosting account online.

Something isn't right about your question.
I'm calling bullshit on the numbers.

 

As I stated before

 

That makes a little more sense. But understand that "hits" don't mean traffic. Every time a search engine bot crosses a link to a page on your site, it registers as a hit.

"Hits" aren't actual users.
If you have a million page views a month, that's a little better measure of actual readers and you should base your hosting needs on that.
Not bot hits.

 

I think you need a dedicated server. Go and talk with this Guys.. They will definitely help you. Over an year working experience and many people of this forum using there services. They are professionals geeks

 

i agree with you, good DS or VPS