I'm looking to get several dedicated servers, I don't require alot of processing speed or storage. And I'm not really picky about uptime, if the system is down for a few hours in a month its not a problem. What I need is alot of bandwidth. It needs to be quick and unlimited! What provider is going to give me the best deal?
View 14 Replies
I have seen on WHT alot of negative comments about cogent?
View 14 Replies View RelatedI have been reviewing a lot of different data-centers and networks, and everybody seems to use different bandwidth providers. Is there any consensus on who the best (Top 5 maybe?) carriers are? According to WikiPedia.org, there are currently only 9 "true" Tier-1 carriers:
Quote:
AOL
AT&T
Cogent
Global Crossing
Level 3
Verizon Business
NTT Communications
Qwest
SAVVIS
Sprint
What other providers offer bandwidth shared by several servers?
As in, I rent several servers connected to one switch and can upgrade the bandwidth later if needed.
So far,
Yes:
Swiftway
Staminus
Razor Servers
No:
Webnx
Volumedrive
Our data facility is located in an area that does not have a variety of providers. Our current provider is Verizon (formelrly MCI) and we are looking into buying a small building and build up a small data facility. Can any one recommend what is the best approach to ineterest more providers in our area or I am just going against the tide?
View 5 Replies View RelatedI'm trying to decide between two Frankfurt co-location providers and I'm not sure who has the better network when it comes to bandwidth and latency. Does anyone know what a good bandwidth provider is in Germany or what an unreliable one is? Or is there any difference?
1st Provider:
NTT, Level 3, Interoute, Colt or BT
2nd Provider:
TeliaSonera and Tiscali for upstreams at DE-CIX and KleyRex
Is there any way to get the IP Range of providers like SAVVIS, Global Crossing, or Level3?
View 1 Replies View RelatedWho defines Tier 1 provider definition?
I am seeing multiple definitions and seeing various posters argue and make claims against Tier 1 and who is/who is not and how many total, etc.. I do not think that there is consensus out there. Personally, I see more than 7 Tier 1 providers and know several other very good Tier 2 or Tier 1b providers.
Many on WHT claim that there are only 6 major Tier 1 providers, but I recently had a CTO who has been in the business since 1996 tell me directly that there are 9 Tier 1 providers. I know that some providers themselves claim to be Tier 1, but many of us “know” that they are not really Tier 1.
So, who are the best Tier 1 providers out there?
Who are the best Tier2 or non-Tier 1 providers?
Who are the best providers to/in Europe? …South America?
I'm looking for unmetered bandwidth adult hosting service providers with Europe-based servers, want to keep this project on the low side.
Has anyone been trying hosting with Exmasters.com?
Do dedicated server providers oversell their bandwidth? Here are some examples.
ThePlanet offers 2500GB bandwidth.
Softlayer offers 2000GB bandwidth
LiquidWeb offers 4800GB bandwidth
I've a remote download site that uses tons of BW (about 900GB daily), and it uses sql connection quite alot - I've set it to max connection for my current server.
For now, I've the intention of separating main site with download server. where The main site will contains the sql DB. But my concern is, I want to buy a cheap VPS for the main site, but no idea if I need high BW and ram.
I host a podcast that's rapidly gaining popularity. At the moment, we push about 100gb/day of transfer for the episodes, but could easily double that in the next few months. I need a host that does at least 2tb a month with the ability to later upgrade to more. My operating budget is about 110$/month, but could go a little higher if needed.
Most of our activity is composed of sending files, so usage is pretty low. I'd probably only need a few gb to store the actual content (30mb mp3 files). It's also important that Adult material is allowed (the content of the audio podcast is explicit).
I'm aware of FDC and AT&T, but would like any other recommendations you guys could give.
I have an unmetered server capped at 100Mbps.
The server is a media server, used to host heavy media files such as videos, flash and so forth. (there is no website on the server, just media files)
Everything works fine, all the media loads without a problem. Downloads are fast.
However, I have big trouble uploading stuffs. The FTP is either extremely slow or disconnects me.
I talked to my host, and they say the server is hitting 100Mbps bandwidth limit, and I should upgrade to 200Mbps. However, all my videos and media load fine, there are no problems except for the FTP.
Are there any solutions to this? I don't want to spend money on another 100Mbps just for FTP, especially when everything else is working without a glitch.
Just an hour ago, my datacenter told me my server (cpanel + with CSF) is using up to 240mbps of inbound
View 3 Replies View RelatedI have a client who has came to me for advice on his web site. I own a dedicated server and manage it using PLESK. I do pretty well managing it but I'm definitely not an expert on hosting by any means. So I need your help.
He is starting a new web site and he is going to do radio advertising on a lot of stations and expects to get a lot of hits. The web site seems to be pretty small with only a few pages of text and minimal pictures, so I don't think it will use that much just by the site being so small.
But anyway, I want him and me to feel comfortable that the site is not going to go down no matter how many hits he gets. How do I guesstimate this?
What are some good hosting companies that offer high bandwidth and protect you from overage charges -- or at least charge little for overages. I'm looking to spend less than $80/month. Also, do you have any idea: How many users will 10GB bandwidth cover if it's only a 5 page site with one picture on each page and 5 paragraphs of text just to get an idea.
I know someone is using the wget -r command on my server to recursively grab all files in a directory, I know their IP but I do not want to ban it completely, instead I was wondering is there a way to kill a connection if the bandwidth used by that connection gets too high?
I'm running CentOS 4
I'm at leaseweb atm - according to their graphs, I am doing around 17mbps 95th and paying $33/m USD for a C2D+1GB+160G HD. Overages are rather expensive though.
View 11 Replies View RelatedI want new company for my servers
My servers for sharing files
So, I want high bandwidth
ex, 10.000GB BW per server out+in
$100-$200
today i got a message from a client asking about hosting his video himself, catch is, he has a shitload of viewers, im looking at servers in the range of quad core (maybe dual quad), 8gig, 4 hdd raid10, gige uplink, however the kicker, depending on how out of whack my estimates are, 100 to 400mbit SUSTAINED upstream (spiking all the way to max'n that 'little' gige pipe)
Has anyone got suggestions on who i should even consider for this? I'm a bit dumbfounded myself as i'v never even thought about a server on this much sustained bandwidth before today.
I have a dedicated server currently hosted over by Aplus.NET
I have a 3000 GB Monthly Transfer limit and we have been going over this limit for the past few months. This has resulted in a large sum of overage fees.
I am looking to go to another hosting company that is just as good as Aplus.NET, if not better... with a better traffic rate. A friend told me about Choopa.com and I wanted to know how good of a company they were. What are some other top reliable hosting companies with premium servers and that specialize in unmetered bandwidth?
I'm picking up a client who is a video production company and hosts a lot of their work for their clients on the web. They have two sites right now for two different branches of what they do, but they are beginning to scale up a bit and want to switch from a local ISP hosting package to something more commercial. I like the idea of a VPS, but their current budget is rather low. Because of that, I am a bit attracted to hosting packages from site5 and dreamhost (both of which I've heard good and bad things about).
Ideally, I would be looking for a VPS along the lines of:
50-75GB disk space
256-512MB RAM
750GB-1TB Bandwidth
Linux OS with Shell Access
cPanel or Plesk Control panel
It'd be nice to keep their budget around $50/mo, but I know that might be asking a lot. They have two websites currently for their production needs. What would be the advantages of a VPS over multiple hosting accounts at Site5 ($7.50/mo) or Dreamhost ($6/mo)?
I'm looking at a project that would need to be located in Panama for server co-location.
It will be very bandwidth intensive, requiring 100 megabits to start and moving up from there. Going with a slightly more "value" oriented provider provided there's a backup (even lower bandwidth) available would be an option, as this application would tolerate limited periods of reduced bandwidth.
Can anybody point me in the direction of some data centers that might be worth looking at? Are there any bandwidth providers down there with a real value focus?
Right now, the best I've seen is $99/megabit from [url] I'm expecting bandwidth to cost more down in Panama, but I'd really like to push this number lower.
My datacenter has told me about my server sending high amount of outbound bandwidth from my server:
During the attack time my email logs, I found several messages:
cpdavd failed @ Thu Nov 6 12:21:18 2008. A restart was attempted
automagically.
Question #1. How can I check which user is using cpdavd (connect from their PC to the home folder)
I suspect someone is connecting their PC to my server and uses very high bandwidth!
The datacenter says the attack is still going on when they plug in the server.
Question #2. How can I check what is sending outgoing traffic on the server right now?
Like if you try to make your own server, it would cost a few thousand right? Or bought one from IBM or something. If you rent a server, it could cost you like double that I notice or even more in a period of a year.
I was looking at the prices of Xeon 5420 and they are like only 400 or something. Motherboard, ram, hdd's shouldn't amount to too much right?
And companies are charging like 50 bucks a month for a 2 gigs of ram.
Or am I actually looking at this wrong and actually am looking at desktop components? So is bandwidth the cost for these prices? In the long run aren't people being ripped off?
if I could get some input on this. Currently I'm running an Opteron 246, 2GB RAM with 2TB bandwidth/mo. I run a single site which is currently 99% HTML, along with an invision forum which is fairly popular. I get about 300-400k pageviews per day.
Right now the server is able to handle this stuff without much of a problem, and the average CPU load is between .5 and 3 (after a TON of tweaking!) - the only exception is when the forum db is being backed up/optimized, which isn't a huge problem since it happens during the off hours.
The problem is that I'm running out of bandwidth quickly, and need to come up with some kind of solution soon. My current provider offers bandwidth at $1/GB, which to me seems crazy compared to other providers, so that's not really an option.
I was thinking about switching to a more affordable provider and upgrading hardware, but I'm not sure what the best approach would be. I'm in the process of moving my HTML content over to a PHP-powered CMS, so I need to make sure whatever I do can handle that... What might be a decent setup for a site like mine which consumes a lot of bandwidth and will probably need more CPU power in the near future for PHP/MySQL stuff?
I know you get what you pay for with hosting, but with the ridiculous overselling going on I am finding it hard to work out how much bandwidth I can genuinely expect to get with about 500MB space and 99%+ (preferably more like 99.5%) uptime for $5/month.
I will be using all this bandwidth for hosting legal mp3s (sanctioned for promotional use by labels and artists), and would prefer the host to be based in the US or UK.
I'm currently running a vBulletin message board with about 26,000 members. At any given time there are about 200 members actively posting.
Right now, we're on a dedicated server with Ilon hosting, however, my members are still complaining that the site runs VERY slowly when there are lots of members online.
To make matters worse, I want to launch a weekly podcast for them, so I'll need even MORE bandwidth.
GoDaddy.com is offering dedicated server accounts with high bandwidth limits (ie 2000 GB). Does anyone have any experience with them? ...
For the past few days, one of the server is causing a bandwidth utilization surge for the entire rack on almost daily basis. It happen for a few minutes and it went off then it will be the same thing again the next day. When the surge is happening, most of the servers on the same segment will be inaccessible for the few minutes.
The bandwidth utilization graph for my rack is recording an abnormal surge from (6mbps --> 90mbps) for the few minutes. My MRTG is showing 2 of the Plesk servers giving the problem but the NOC guys said it the Cpanel that causing the problem.
I tried logging in to both servers but could not find what's the cause for this.
I have a site that uses extreme amounts of bandwidth, I checked some of the popular companies like serverbeach and softlayer. Right now I'm leaning more towards serverbeach because they are cheaper, Are they a good company to go with? Let me know if you have any other recommendations.
View 14 Replies View RelatedHigh bandwidth, fast speed, any cp, basic hardware-manag. only, trustable
View 4 Replies View RelatedThis is my 1st post on this forum and my sole reason is to gain some valuable advice from members of this great community to my hosting predicament below.
We are currently developing an e-commerce website that has similar business model as woot.com. I believe you have heard of this website before as it is very popular in the U.S. Their business model is to sell 1 item a day and the sale will end prematurely if the quantity of the product is sold off before the day ends.
What I would like to bring your attention is that woot.com has a special event called “WOOTOFF”, whereby instead of selling 1 item a day, they would have successive items for sale JUST FOR THE DAY. On this special “WOOTOFF” occasion, there would be A HUGE TRAFFIC SPIKE FOR THE DAY as compared to their regular days. Traffic could increase 10 FOLD or more for this “WOOTOFF” event when compared to their regular daily affair sales.
OUR WEBSITE
As a startup business similar to woot.com, we intend to start off with only 1 dedicated server to handle our entire frontend, backend, and database web operation and to handle REGULAR traffic flow on normal day sales, in which we would expect around less than 5K CONCURRENT active users to visit our website on a daily basis for the first few months. There would also be a blog and forum as well on our site.
Since we will be having such similar “WOOTOFF” event (probably once every 2 – 3 months), the traffic will definitely increase multiple folds for that 24 hours and our 1 unit server definitely will not be able to cope with the increased traffic load. Also, it is not economical to just go out and rent extra dedicated servers to handle that spike of traffic load (in that 24 hours) whereby we will have pay for the extra servers based on the entire month’s fee. This means out of the 30 days in a month, the additional rented servers’ and bandwidth resource are only fully utilized for that 1 day while the remaining 29 days are sitting there idle.
Just to illustrate my point. Let say to handle our normal traffic flow, we have 2 present servers in place. When we run the “WOOTOFF” event and if we were to expect a 10 fold hike in traffic, then the additional number of servers we need to add is 10 x 2 = 20 additional servers. If each server rental costs like US$400.00 per month, we are looking at paying US$8,000 just for the rental of the 20 additional servers in a month, but are only used for ONE day to handle the traffic and bandwidth spike while the remaining days are left idle. This method and the associated cost involved to handle that 1 day traffic spike is not acceptable for us at all.
I HOPE YOU GUYS CAN SOLVE THE QUESTIONS I HAVE BELOW BASED ON THE ABOVE “WOOTOFF” SCENARIO.
1. Is there any dedicated server provider that allows for customers to only pay for the additional servers and bandwidth resources just to handle the additional traffic spike for that day’s usage?
2. I understand that there is a method to pay as you use method by utilizing Amazon S3 or CDN network but I’m completely clueless about how to go about this.
3. To your knowledge, what would be the most cost effective solution and how you’d go about it if you were in a shoestring budget whereby you’d only want to pay for the additional servers and bandwidth just for the day’s usage?
HERE IS A QUESTION FOR YOU BASED ON NORMAL SERVER UPGRADE OR ADDITIONS BASED ON STEADY INCREASE OF NORMAL TRAFFIC.
In the near future, if our website is recording a steady increase of NORMAL traffic and our primary 1st server cannot handle the increased traffic, of course we would have to add more dedicated servers whereby the newly added servers will be a permanent fixture paid on a monthly basis to take care of the steady increase of NORMAL traffic.
4. What would be your advice to me to load balance the traffic who insist on the most convenient, optimal and economical load balance solution to handle the steady increase of NORMAL traffic flow? E.g. server clustering, server mirrors, round robin DNS, etc as opposed to renting a load balancing router hardware from server providers that could cost like US$500+ monthly (rental + each server setup) whether it is being used or not.
