Uploading MP3's to the forum server will not be possible

[64Guitars]

Received a response from bluehost:

A database of that size while not specifically against our TOS does generally cause performance problems on a Shared hosting environment such as ours. For larger databases such as that I would normally recommend looking into a virtual private server or a dedicated server, or in some cases just a dedicated server for the database it's self.

Basically, this is not good because although it is not against their TOS, it is frowned upon and will most certainly be a problem in the future, when the database grows.

It sounds like it's not a problem right now but you're worried about the future. So, why don't you leave everything as it is for now? Members are already looking at offsite storage sites like MediaFire, Dropbox, Ubuntu One, and Box.net. When we find one or more sites that prove to be suitable, members can start using them with the singlemp3 tags for new posts instead of uploading the files to BossBR.net. That will slow down the growth of the attachments folder. Additionally, members can start moving their previously-posted songs to offsite storage themselves and edit their messages to link the MP3 player to the offsite file. That way, the old posts will still work.

Before I delete anything, a backup with all the MP3 files will be put online in some free backup storage. Which can be a way for users to manually link to their post, using the singlemp3 tag.

If you find a suitable free storage site to put the files, I volunteer to edit all the old posts and link the MP3 player to the offsite files. However, I'll need the attachment numbers of each file to identify them with the posts. The filename alone is not enough because many songs have been posted with very cryptic filenames ("T12V2_01.MP3", for example) and there's no way I'll be able to match them up with the posts unless I also have the attachment number. Also, I ask that you don't delete any existing MP3s. Instead, I will delete them one-at-a-time as I edit the posts. That way, all of the old posts will still work. They'll just gradually move from the BossBR.net server to offsite storage.

[Tony W]

64 that is an extreme undertaking. Off the top of my head, I'm thinking it will be about 2 months work considering many posts have multiple links to attachments. Is it a possibility to copy the database in tact to another location and do a find and replace on the path?

[64Guitars]

Pedro: Did you ever look into the possibility of adding the SoundClick MP3 Player widget to BossBR.net? See this message:

https://songcrafters.org/community/index.php?topic=4442.msg52744#msg52744

Many members already have songs posted on SoundClick. Unfortunately, they can't link them to our MP3 player with the singlemp3 tags because SoundClick hides the URL of the files. But they do provide their own MP3 Player widget which can be embedded in any HTML page. If you could add a new SoundClick button in the message editor which would embed the SoundClick Player widget into a message, then your problem would be solved. We could just tell everyone to open a SoundClick account and post their songs there. Then they could add the player to their message here without attaching any files.

[Wiley]

64 When I checked out soundclick, It seemed very strict on posting any cover songs. You had to contact so and so and pay for the rights etc.  If that is the case that will leave many of us out in the cold. For me SoundClick is not the answer, if I understood their rules. For many it would probably work as they do mostly originals. So I guess we wait and see what happens!

[64Guitars]

I'm not suggesting that SoundClick should be the only way of posting songs here. But, as many members are already using it, we could move a lot of files off the server. For those who don't want to use SoundClick, the [singlemp3][/singlemp3] tags could still be used to link our existing MP3 player to files stored at some other site. We just need to find a site that will allow direct linking to the files. SkyDrive's unsuitable because they change the link every day. I suspect that MediaFire and Box.net do the same. I'm not sure about Dropbox and Ubuntu One. I might try Ubuntu One next week. There are probably other free storage sites we need to check out too.

Update:  FileDEN looks very promising. See this message.

[Pine]

Hi Wiley..
   I've been at SC for over 4 years and have seen hundreds of folks upload cover songs, myself included. The only time you need to pay fees and all that is if you are selling your covers. You would also want to avoid (just to be on the safe side) allowing them for free download as well. These are options you can easily choose in the uploading process. Don't let that issue discourage you from archiving songs there.

[Wiley]

Ok,  They just made it sound like it costs.!!  Will wait and see what happens.

[Ted]

Received a response from bluehost:

A database of that size while not specifically against our TOS does generally cause performance problems on a Shared hosting environment such as ours. For larger databases such as that I would normally recommend looking into a virtual private server or a dedicated server, or in some cases just a dedicated server for the database it's self.

Not so fast. In principle, a large database causes server load issues only if it's being accessed frequently. Does the account have a bandwidth quota, or a database quota?  Sometimes these are separate parts of the hosting plan.  Read the TOS for these provisions.

The position you need to take is that it's not a file space issue, per their agreement. And that you are not using their Web sever to backup your hard drive. A simple look at the access logs would confirm that the MP3s are being accessed by site visitors (which would not be the case if you were using the site for your personal storage).

Therefore...

• If it's a database issue and MP3s are stored in the database table, then there is a way of writing these files to the disk, and then re-link to the files using the [singlemp3][/singlemp3] tags. It might take a little scripting--or some SMF hacker might already have figured this out.  But that would reduce the size and load on the database.
• If it's a bandwidth issue then we need to consider the alternate bandwidth options, such as hosting the files elsewhere.  (Take a look at your usage statistics to see if you really are bumping into a contractual threshold.)

We were bound to run into a speedbump like this sooner or later.

If your usage statistics and analytics show usage through the roof, then that's actually a very good problem to have--it's data you can take to Boss (or another sponsor) and say, "We've been boostering the BR product line for free.  Now we need a revenue stream to keep this particular PR machine alive."

I'm sure even a dedicated server wouldn't cost a corporate sponsor more than $1200 US per year.  That's peanuts. In return they could get an acknowledgment in the footer (Hosting Support Generously Provided by XYZ Corporation).

[Ferryman_1957]

Ted, good post. I'll wear a Boss t-shirt as well if it would help get sponsorship....

BTW, have we thought about getting Boss to link to this site from the corporate web page?

Cheers,

Nigel

[dwardzala]

64 When I checked out soundclick, It seemed very strict on posting any cover songs. You had to contact so and so and pay for the rights etc.  If that is the case that will leave many of us out in the cold. For me SoundClick is not the answer, if I understood their rules. For many it would probably work as they do mostly originals. So I guess we wait and see what happens!

I agree with Wiley here, I looked into it awhile back too, and, since I really only do covers, I didn't think it would work for me.

Saw the later post, but the TOS on soundclick certainly made it seem as if I could get into difficulty.  Given the music industry's penchant for doing stupid things to make a point, I decided to avoid soundclick altogether.