Storage Options


I trust Bubble doesn’t offer any storage plans, so AWS will have to be a go-to for me in this case. It seems like there should be a storage option for the File Uploader bit (as stated in the documentation) but I can’t seem to find it. How can I setup AWS S3 storage so large files that users will be uploading will be uploaded and can be referred to via AWS? May have a link returned to the file uploaded for backend purposes?

Any other options besides AWS? What other storage uploading options are available to us, feature-wise?

1 Like

Bubble does offer storage as part of the hosting service. All files and images uploaded (in edit and run mode) go to S3 (alternatively you can use box, but it’s a more advanced feature). You don’t need to worry about storage, it just works.

And yes, the file and image uploader return a link as their value. Have you done the send data to pages lesson? It uses the file uploader.

Hey Emmanuel,

It’s great to get a prompt response. So are you saying storage is something we shouldn’t worry about? Is there a limit of any kind? I would think Bubble doesn’t allow anything beyond a certain size per file or as a total through the app. I’ll need people to upload video files, which as you can imagine, will tally up quickly.

File uploads are limited to 50mb per file (but that’s the only limit), which covers most needs. We’re going to release soon that handles videos so that’ll go to a different service, as it’s, indeed, a different situation.

1 Like


So in all, Bubble users don’t have to care about the amount of storage they use at all? Just fair use?

Yeah, it’s pretty much unlimited. If at some point it’s becoming an issue we’ll reach out to you, but we haven’t had that situation in more than 3 years.

1 Like

Fantastic. Much appreciated.

Anyway we can have that limit upgraded on a request basis? How far away are we from the video uploading?

Yes, if that gets too high, we’ll reach out and chat.

For the video, it’s a few days away :slightly_smiling: .

Regarding video I guess you were talking about Ziggeo, right? Is having Google Picasa/Drive API as a Bubble plugin in the plans? A lot of people already upload their videos for free on Google Photos and it would be a great integration both to add and find videos without storing on Bubble or other service. Amazon Cloud Drive is also good for videos but far less people are willing to pay $59 per year.

1 Like

That’s something we could look at on a sponsored basis. however, the way we’d add that would be to read stuff, not upload files, as it’s a much bigger architecture project.

I know it’s well documented that the individual file size limit is 50mb for uploading, but is that something that might increase one day? I definitely wouldn’t mind paying extra subscription costs to allow for additional storage capabilities. It’s not vital for my current apps, but is something we’ll need to figure out for a future app.

On a related note, can we bypass the 50mb limit if we have the user interact with an iFrame to a non-Bubble site we built?

This is something we’d like to do at some point, were aware it’s limiting, but it’s a major important infrastructure project. And no timeline for now.

Regarding the iframe it’s a different page within a page, so I guess that could do it

Cool. At some point, we might give it a try through an iframe to see what happens. Not urgent for us by any means, thanks for the response!

Our access to S3 is limited to 50MB, a crazy Enterprise account for Box is required to get the API keys, and Ziggeo is a ridiculously-pricey platform for what it is. Seems like there’s little support for storage options. I think I speak for all Bubblers when I say that getting the ability to link up our own S3 account would have been above-and-beyond more beneficial than the options we got instead.

This post is from early January and nothing has changed for me. I need users to be able to upload their videos and need storage options that don’t limit me to the knees or cost an arm and a leg.

Keep in mind that if we build our own video upload infrastructure, it’s likely going to be similar in terms of cost to ziggeo (or other providers). There is a lot of work and stuff to do when you do video processing not, and that’s costly.

At the end of the day, storage and bandwidth cost money.

It’s more along the lines of ‘let us integrate our own S3 storage’ than ‘you build a video infrastructure.’
This is about file storage as a whole, not limited to video - that’s just my own implementation.

All-in-all, let us hookup our own S3 buckets, remove the file limit, and call it a day. Pweez. :slight_smile:

The limit isn’t because our S3 cost, it’s because streaming large chunks of files could take the whole thing down. If you look at box, dropbox, etc they have a different endpoint for uploads (hence a different infrastructure)… That’s why it’s a major project.

Using your S3 instead of ours won’t change anything.

Believe me, if it were easy, we’d do it.

1 Like

Fair enough. Would that apply to Blockspring too? The other post recommended Bubble -> Blockspring -> S3.

At the end of it, how can we enable our users to upload large files and how can we get a link to them in return?
I’m positive this is a big question that we’d all like to be aware of prior to starting out future projects.

1 Like

Well currently we don’t have a good answer for that in the Bubble system, sorry. Now if your users upload a major file to box, etc and input the URL that could do it. maybe you can have a webhook from S3 that saves the link in the Bubble database with an API Workflow.

1 Like