Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by londons_explore 2780 days ago
Youtubes infrastructure costs are massive - well into the $1B+ per year category.

Netflix might serve more gigabytes to users, but netflix's content library is tiny in comparison, so edge caches have a near 100% hit rate keeping infrastructure costs a fraction of youtube's costs.
2 comments
saagarjha 2780 days ago
If YouTube has edge caches, which I would be very surprised if they didn't, I'd think their edge cache hit rate would still be pretty high. Not 100%, obviously, but still over 50%–most people watch the same set of popular videos, with a very long tail of unpopular ones that are occasionally watched.
link
selectodude 2780 days ago
I wouldn’t be surprised if Netflix’s entire library was under 100 terabytes. You could have 100 percent of the content served from edge caches with that.
link
sbr464 2780 days ago
I haven't tried to estimate the size, but I think one thing that may enlarge it is all of the extra copies of content for various resolutions, different bit rates to support bandwidth issues, and optimized versions for the different mobile devices & apps. That's a lot of different files for 1 piece of content.

Edit--Found this quote from an article[0] written in 2013, so I'm sure it's much larger now. Also, the Open Connect Appliances[1] have about 240TB capacity each, but they just tail the current popular content.

The master Neflix catalog takes up about 3.14 petabytes of cloud storage space, which is converted and compressed down to about 2.75 petabytes, consisting of 100 different versions suitable for watching on more than 1000 different devices.

[0] https://gizmodo.com/how-netflix-makes-3-14-petabytes-of-vide...

[1] https://openconnect.netflix.com/en/hardware/

link