Best Laravel Hosting Option

You can always scale up if needed with digital ocean, so that or AWS would be good. You definitely want a host where you can scale when needed.

Thanks for your feedback and time and i know there are unlimited cases that could come into play and endless options for theoretical uses of 10 user to 1 million users, and is the server Linux or Windows or AMD vs Intel and where are the users and whats their age and go on and on with endless if this or if that.

So make it simple and say an exam question => When selecting a server for a website thats will be heavy on graphic manipulation your best option would be to select:

A. General purpose use B. CPU-Optimized C. RAM-Optimized

B and C, but too heavy go with load balancing. https://docs.digitalocean.com/products/networking/load-balancers/ That is if a lot of concurrent users.

A few users a month, even a shared host would work, but you can't scale.

Edit: With easy scaling, I wouldn't worry about it now, scale when needed.

Thanks for your feedback, appreciate your time and insights

go with the cheapest and monitor.

Until you get too much traffic to deal with it, then you can upgrade.

Image and manipulation is not particularly taxing.

Thanks @snapey I currently have a decent dev setup 4 core / 8 RAM but just me simply testing the upload which makes 5 different sized images is rather slow. Code has been refactored over and over with different compression to none and still too slow for my liking. Fewer image manipulations makes things run faster but was hoping hardware could improve this process and just looking for insight from the community

@movepixels like I said scale only when needed. But uploading 5 images or changing 5 images is not going to be super fast even with one user. Even on a fast desktop app images can take a little while. I have Adobe Photoshop with a macro to web optimize images. I have 16 gig ram, but yet it still takes a little while to do a folder with say 15 images.

And what are you calling slow, a few seconds for images is expected.

Edit: You need to scale later, like I mentioned before, if you get a lot of concurrent users. That is the main reason to scale. Probably a load balance setup.

@jlrdw very true indeed. Not going to get into to details about the code and such but basically user is expected to upload hi-quality images and the upload takes ~1-2 seconds based on a 3mb image, that image then gets resized down 5 times (using previous resized image) and thats taking ~12-15 seconds sometime and thats incredibly long (round trip from upload, processing and return images to front-end).

Hence the reason for the question. I tried dispatch a job to run it in the background after the fact but there are some cases on the site where each image is shown in 3 sizes after the upload so I can't really send it off to a job since its needed immediately. So i was looking for insight as to upping the CPU or the RAM which would be the go to option

After upload, show the first image and have a job run to finish the rest. Perhaps a spinner and message:

Your images are being processed.

I have used an online video converter (just example), and sometimes fairly fast, but others can take 30 seconds plus, so give the user feedback. The feedback assures the user that all is going okay.

Edit: Even some large images being uploaded to Google Drive can take a few seconds.

@jlrdw Excellent point, I do have a spinner "one moment.... men @ work" type notification so user knows something is happening.

Probably I am trying to do much at once and refactor order of operations.

I suppose also time lag could be attributed to the S3 upload and passed back to user, so image is adding extra milage on its journey

what image library are you using? that's incredibly slow..

Using Intervention for the modifications / scaling / cropping functions.

Basically user uploads large image, keep the original and scale that image down 5 times using the previous scaled image to down size.

XL -> L -> M -> S -> XS