As a MyBB Forum gets bigger using just one server might not be enough however keeping the file system in sync across multiple servers can be a challenge. I think MyBB should support the most common Cloud Object Storage Providers (For example AWS S3) for avatars and attachments. Thoughts?
Given that this can already be accomplished in 1.8 via the use of DRBD and GlusterFS, I can't see this being used by a great enough proportion of forum administrators to make it worth baking into the core. Forum administrators with large enough boards should hopefully be aware of and have a basic understanding of the two tools I mentioned earlier.
(2017-12-04, 02:00 PM)kawaii Wrote: [ -> ]Given that this can already be accomplished in 1.8 via the use of DRBD and GlusterFS, I can't see this being used by a great enough proportion of forum administrators to make it worth baking into the core. Forum administrators with large enough boards should hopefully be aware of and have a basic understanding of the two tools I mentioned earlier.
Software like Discourse have recognized that object storage is the future for image storage. Let's keep MyBB modern and do the same.
(2017-12-04, 02:00 PM)kawaii Wrote: [ -> ]Given that this can already be accomplished in 1.8 via the use of DRBD and GlusterFS, I can't see this being used by a great enough proportion of forum administrators to make it worth baking into the core. Forum administrators with large enough boards should hopefully be aware of and have a basic understanding of the two tools I mentioned earlier.
I agree with that. Most forums don't have an abundance of attachments because members already add cloud links to downloads. Which is better for everyone.
And we have reasonable options for avatars too.
We already have support for pull type CDNs in 1.8. I can see some use for extending that to push type CDNs, one possible approach being through a file system abstraction such as flysystem:
https://flysystem.thephpleague.com
(2017-12-04, 05:45 PM)Euan T Wrote: [ -> ]We already have support for pull type CDNs in 1.8. I can see some use for extending that to push type CDNs, one possible approach being through a file system abstraction such as flysystem: https://flysystem.thephpleague.com
I already use Cloudflare as a CDN. I want to use S3 primary for storing files. If you run a huge forum with 100s of Gb of images and attachments eventually it becomes too many files for one server, that's where S3 CAN HELP.
(2017-12-05, 01:00 PM)Lunorian Wrote: [ -> ] (2017-12-04, 05:45 PM)Euan T Wrote: [ -> ]We already have support for pull type CDNs in 1.8. I can see some use for extending that to push type CDNs, one possible approach being through a file system abstraction such as flysystem: https://flysystem.thephpleague.com
I already use Cloudflare as a CDN. I want to use S3 primary for storing files. If you run a huge forum with 100s of Gb of images and attachments eventually it becomes too many files for one server, that's where S3 CAN HELP.
I think you misunderstood what I was saying. A "push" type CDN would allow the offloading of any uploaded content (avatars, attachments, etc) and other static content (CSS files, for example) to services like S3 or BackBlaze B2 or DigitalOcean Spaces automatically upon upload/change - which is exactly what you were/are asking for.
Quote: If you run a huge forum with 100s of Gb of images and attachments eventually it becomes too many files for one server, that's where S3 CAN HELP.
I gotta ask if you know of any actual MyBB forum that has more than 100Gb of attachments. And 100Gb is actually something reasonable for a dedicated server to manage. AW3 isn't as cheap as you'd think. When compared to getting a dedicated it loses ground.
If a MyBB forum existed serving that many attachments it's almost certain they would have a dedicated. CDN pushing is helpful in serving content like JS,CSS, and static images but not nearly as efficient for serving attachments.
A site with huge attachments would be more of a download site which might be used for warez. I can't think of a case-use for this feature that's legitimate.
Sorry, just don't want to see the team waste time on a feature no one really needs.
(2017-12-05, 07:45 PM)labrocca Wrote: [ -> ]Quote: If you run a huge forum with 100s of Gb of images and attachments eventually it becomes too many files for one server, that's where S3 CAN HELP.
I gotta ask if you know of any actual MyBB forum that has more than 100Gb of attachments. And 100Gb is actually something reasonable for a dedicated server to manage. AW3 isn't as cheap as you'd think. When compared to getting a dedicated it loses ground.
If a MyBB forum existed serving that many attachments it's almost certain they would have a dedicated. CDN pushing is helpful in serving content like JS,CSS, and static images but not nearly as efficient for serving attachments.
A site with huge attachments would be more of a download site which might be used for warez. I can't think of a case-use for this feature that's legitimate.
Sorry, just don't want to see the team waste time on a feature no one really needs.
Legitimate use case: Let's say you have a game development forum where people can discuss and share fan games. Each game takes let's say 100M. That adds up quickly and overtime you could fill up the disk. AWS S3 isn't cheap but it alleviates the need for more/bigger hard drives.
(2017-12-05, 07:49 PM)Lunorian Wrote: [ -> ]Legitimate use case: Let's say you have a game development forum where people can discuss and share fan games. Each game takes let's say 100M. That adds up quickly and overtime you could fill up the disk. AWS S3 isn't cheap but it alleviates the need for more/bigger hard drives.
So that's a theoretical use case but not a real one. Be real. A game development site wouldn't use MyBB forum for attachments. Even MyBB itself goes to Github.
Forum software has attachment capabilities but it's not a suitable software for your scenario.
And attachments can be uploaded to so many different places. I'd 100% prefer attachments go to members cloud services where they get to choose where they store it and my server doesn't have to store nor serve it.
You should consider what I'm saying about practical usage. Too often members get caught up in the "oh that would be cool" feature instead of actually how and who would use it.