KT Walrus Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 I'm thinking of using Amazon S3 storage for all attachments uploaded to my forum. Amazon makes it fairly easy (I think) to upload files to your bucket from PHP (there is an AWS PHP SDK provided). Please consider implementing uploading attachments directly to an AWS S3 bucket as an admin option in IPB. I think this feature would be of use for more people than just me since Amazon storage is "pay as you go" and very cheap given that it is highly available and is backed up much better than most hosting packages that people use to host their forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ae9803 Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Problem with stuff like that, is if the company decides to cancel it, then IPboard is stuck with a useless feature that just takes up space, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KT Walrus Posted September 24, 2012 Author Share Posted September 24, 2012 Amazon will never cancel S3. Also, IPS is integrating CDN into IPB for the next release. They could integrate S3 storage service for attachments in the same way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZackL Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Likely, this would have to be a 3rd party addition. I don't think IPS is in the habit of relying on 3rd party tools/websites that might go down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dmacleo Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 can't you do so now? thought I read someone was using it but I easily could go wrong. thought s3 allowed sftp uploads for transfer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mat Barrie Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Problem with stuff like that, is if the company decides to cancel it, then IPboard is stuck with a useless feature that just takes up space, Likely, this would have to be a 3rd party addition. I don't think IPS is in the habit of relying on 3rd party tools/websites that might go down. AJAX served from Google APIs. Bing Maps in Gallery. These things and more are third party tools/websites that probably go down less than the hosting account your forum is hosted on, and are less likely to be shut down than the host you are hosting your forum with, and are already relied upon in IP.Board. I would consider it stunningly unlikely that Amazon would ever axe an AWS service, relied upon by companies the likes of Netflix and more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZackL Posted September 24, 2012 Share Posted September 24, 2012 Good point. Although not to argue further, the Google API's are a setting you can opt for on your own forum. I'm interested in IPS' CDN implementation. I may have to look into getting that setup (if, for anything, knowledge of how to set it up) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stormyweather Posted March 17, 2013 Share Posted March 17, 2013 I have the hosted version of IPB. I would like my members to be able to upload attachments to posts but have those hosted and served from Amazon S3. I also would like them to still have the thumbnail and light-box functionality that exists with attachments now. I don't think there is a 3rd party solution for this already which I think is odd given how many people would probably pay to get it. Does anyone know why that might be - is there a technical issue or difficulty with implementing this? Maybe people have tried and come up against problems? I ask because I need this and will fund the development of a plugin or hook for the hosted IPB version at least. But would like to know that I am not asking for something that is inherently impossible or in some way is made impossible due to the way the hosted version works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GreenLinks Posted March 18, 2013 Share Posted March 18, 2013 I also support this request. Ability to upload attachments to S3 can be a huge benefit for Big Boards. Though this functionality should be supported globally by all file uploads on IPB not only attachments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chatgroup Posted August 28, 2013 Share Posted August 28, 2013 +1 this would be incredibly helpful for scaling our board. We attempted to use S3FS a while ago but it was far too unstable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totus Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 I'm thinking of using Amazon S3 storage for all attachments uploaded to my forum. Amazon makes it fairly easy (I think) to upload files to your bucket from PHP (there is an AWS PHP SDK provided). Please consider implementing uploading attachments directly to an AWS S3 bucket as an admin option in IPB. I think this feature would be of use for more people than just me since Amazon storage is "pay as you go" and very cheap given that it is highly available and is backed up much better than most hosting packages that people use to host their forums. Hi Did you get this sorted? I want to host my videos on Amazone sc and then have them play in the forum (Ip Board) Any idea how to do this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Management Lindy Posted September 24, 2014 Management Share Posted September 24, 2014 Hi Did you get this sorted? I want to host my videos on Amazone sc and then have them play in the forum (Ip Board) Any idea how to do this? This is available in IPS4, but I'm afraid is not an option in IPB 3.x unless you use something like s3fs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flitterkill Posted September 24, 2014 Share Posted September 24, 2014 You should be happy with IPB4 IPS4 when it is released. And you can specify which content gets stored where be it local file system, ftp, etc. Here are the current items that you can specify storage for: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.