I've been running a website now for about 8 years. It's gone through one name change. We've been with a company called flexihostings for a long time on a dedicated server but I think the sites design wasn't scalable and because of that the site has been running from one server and struggling as the traffic increased. Recently the traffic got to a point where the costs of serving the site from one location lead to it's demise. The site was slow, unresponsive and the answer from flexihostings was more about putting in more RAM, rather then us thinking about new technology. Some of the guys decided to pull the plug because of this before fixing the site but I'm going to start something back up from scratch but build it with scalability in mind to actually reduce the costs and pay for what I use.
Site Needs - Probably 2-3 Terrabytes of Bandwidth (to be scalable) - Site Ability to handle Flash Video Encoder etc for upload of user videos. (Scalability later as traffic grows) - Site ability to handle lots of database activity. Approx 30-40 queries a second as the site is very dynamic. (Or is there a better way to do this) - Ability to handle API's later on other sites from the information on the new site.
Ideas on Rebuilding a Site like this. - Amazons S3 Cloudfront Service to handle media such as images and video to reduce bandwidth. Instead of my server hosting these files should I use this service to put all my images and video up onto so that the bandwidth is paid for externally. This would mean I don't need a crazy amount of bandwidth on the server package I select, is this correct? I'm also reducing the bandwidth as they serve these images like a CDN. - A spin off is to use a content delivery network. Again what's peoples thoughts on this if traffic starts low and increases over time. Is this something that is affordable up front and scalable as the traffic increases.
Love to hear people's ideas on this. The traffic I'm thinking of is starting around the 50,000-100,000 uniques a month with 500,000 page views. This is what the old site was getting and I won't have any issues getting it back there quickly, to be honest that isn't that great but we were climbing very fast when it crashed averaging 100 new members a day. This then has heaps of possibilities, 2 to 3 million uniques and the equivalent meaning if the page view ratio was the same 30,000,000 page views. (Hmm does that seem unrealistic) Either way I want to be on something that is scalable and need a host that understands this.
Whats your advice, go dedicated to put everything on anyway, or have multiple servers to handle different things. Or is shared hosting fine for this is I share the content around the web?
Many of us create websites hoping that they get a lot of hits.
How can you ensure that if your web site gets a lot of hits, that it doesn't get knocked over, that it can scale and take many hits? I am not talking about a DoS attack. I am talking about a website that gets very popular and gets a lot of hits.
Will soon be launching a new web-service with high expectations for immediate growth and usage. Assuming I'm not totally delusional, and traffic surges reasonably rapidly, I guess we will need a solid, scalable service.
Cost is definitely a concern. I expect a dedicated server will be required - although should it flop, we'd rather not be going through the hassle of changing/paying more than we should.
Essentially my questions are:
Can anyone recommend a responsive, customer-centric, reliable host that would allow and arrange an instant upgrade to a dedicated server from a VPS, say..?
Assume an 'average' spec dedicated server with a good host - approximately how much traffic could this handle?
Our website is quite low on resources - very few images, well optimized, essentially running PHP5 & MySQL DB's.
I realise that's kinda like asking the length of a piece of string, but I'm trying my best. Any light you can shed would be much appreciated.
So in summary, looking for a reliable, responsive and competitively priced host which would react well to a sudden surge in traffic and be helpful in assisting with possible upgrade solutions..
if anyone would be able to offer suggestions for setting up a scalable server setup. Here's the situation.
I currently have one web server in a LAMP environment. This server houses both the application and the database.
I would like to setup something that provides more redundancy, and offers the ability to scale as needbe.
It seems there are quite a few options, here's what I am currently aware of.
1) Multiple servers, each house a copy of the database and the applications/files
2) Separate application server and database servers. For sake of redundancy, there would be two load balanced application servers and two clustered database servers.
Currently, with my setup of 1 server, the load is not bad, so it's really for redundancy than anything else, the bonus however would be a setup that is relatively easy to scale as the load became more testing.
We have a small web+email hosting and data center business in Africa. We've been providing hosting services to our clients using Plesk on Dell-based servers (connected over a Fiberchannel interface to a SAN). Our data center is connected via an STM-4 and multiple STM-1s to 2 different upstream providers.
The problem we're having is (as a result of our own lack of knowledge) that our solution is just not scalable in the current configuration. We essentially buy a Dell server, install Plesk and keep provisioning customer domains (web and mail hosting) on it till capacity runs out (we max out on average at 400 domains per server) and then buy the next Dell machine and repeat.
What we're looking for is advice on building a more scalable and automated solution. Essentially we're looking for a software and hardware solution (blade solution with web and mail software that is able to harness the power / redundancy of multiple blade servers) that enables us to provision thousands of customers at one go (and simply add more blades servers as needed).
I'm completely torn on going the absolute budget route vs spending more for something that'll allow easy upgradeability in the future. I basically need lots of space but file sending-- media like mp3s, video, etc.
it'll be raid 5 and I'll need at least 2-3TB initially but the ability to expand would be nice.
option 1: nice chassis with plenty of hotswap bays with sas expanders expensive sas raid card
option 2: cheap chassis to serve "immediate" needs and go with more later. not sure what I'd use as a card? maybe even onboard?
regarding reliability: I once saw a database of failure rates of different models. raptor was the most reliable of the "desktop" drives. anyone have the link? I'm wondering of the seagate ES drives are worth the extra money vs the non-ES drives. they're supposedely more reliable and the "server versions" of sata drives.
Hello, I've tried several companies and I almost gave up the search for what I need. Maybe someone here can help me find a hosting solution with these requirements: 1) A reseller account / Multi domains for different websites 2) ASP + .net + MS Access with mutli-lingual support 3) PHP 5 + MySQL 5 4) Allow Remote access to mysql thru port (not phpMyAdmin) 5) International Fast connection 6) 24/7 support 7) Location: US
We now have a WHM Vps and also a Dedicated for reselling VPS both located in the UK. At the moment our WHM Vps backs up to an 'Unlimited shared hosting package' but we're sure we're going to be kicked off sooner or later because were using about 50GB storage. We were wondring what everyone else uses to backup? Another disk attached to the server?
Offsite? And how you deal with the extra bandwidth a backup would use.
We now need a solution that can backup our new VPS server and our WHM server. It needs to be in the UK/EU to comply with data protection.
we have a vps hosting package through liquidweb which offers 200gb of bandwidth.
Recently we got a bill with an overage fee of $2527.5 for 3370GB additional bandwidth. I looked at all the cpanel logs and since we had the hosting account we never went over 10gb including the month they said we went over 3370 GB. I put a ticket into liquidweb and they said we launched "Multi-media services" during the same month of the overage, resulting in the overage. We did no such thing, the only thing we did was add content to our website. In the end they want us to pay the bill without offering any log or idea where the bandwidth came from. I'm just wondering if theres anything we can do other then just taking a bill for $2500 of unknowns.
Been trying to decide the best solution to my problem with my current hosting limitations (site has outgrown current shared hosting...getting lots of suspensions due to high load or "exceeds CPU" errors.
Since I am a developer/designer, I'm wondering if a reseller account would be a solution to my problem.
I was looking at managed VPS as well and trying to educate myself on all the ins and outs.
With a reseller account, are you still sharing with others?
What are the limitations?
Would I have better performance with a reseller account than a regular budget priced shared account? (currently w/BlueHost)
Please educate me so I can FINALLY make a decision. I'm so sick of the problems I've been having lately and eager to find a good solution.
We need a High Speed "FTP Storage Solution" for transferring our files securely between our offices.
requirements are simple: 1. High Speed / Good Port Speed in Megs. 2. Unlimited Sub-Accounts 3. Restrict Access by Sub-Account 4. FTP Based Access is Important 5. Ability to Create Read Only / Write Only Sub-Accounts
Space: 2 GB + Bandwidth: 20GB + Speed: Speed is Key For us. He need high speed Solution. Something in tune of Many MeGPS connectivity. Not shared.
im getting a server redone soon and looking for a small temp backup solution I got about 40gb of data that I need to backup and will need double in transfer. Also hopefully can run some basic web services to do somepicture hosting for auctions I run. Uses a few 100mb/mo. Im looking for rec. of cheap VPS hosting that offer big space/transfer and dont charge a really high setup fee I dont need any kind ofcontrol panel.
we have 5 Rack with about 110 servers and 200mbit of connection, every rack use 1 cisco catalyst 2950 without any hw firewall (we use iptables) now we want organize all with a cisco pix 535 firewall and a traffic shaping solution, what do u think of this configuration?
Ethernet connection from datacenter | | 1 Gigabit swith with the 200mbit connection | | 2 Cisco Pix 535 in fail over | | Traffic shaping server | | | | | | | switch1 switch2 switch3 switch4 switch5
I have a few VPS's, the main one has cPanel/WHM and runs all my sites / email / DNS and MySQL DB's. Heres a little info:
VPS1 - CentOS 4.4, cPanel/WHM, runs all domains (OpenVZ) VPS2 - CentOS 4.4, Webmin, Slave DNS to VPS1 using Webmin cluster (OpenVZ) VPS3 - CentOS 4.4, Webmin, Slave DNS to VPS1 using Webmin cluster (Xen)
However, if VPS1 fails for say 24 hours, im screwed!
So, my question is can I get some kind of redunadancy built in somewhere. For example if someone is trying to access my domain "mydomain.com" and the main VPS is down, then the request for the site would go to VPS2, or VPS3...
The same for the mail server, if some is sending mail to one of the domains on the VPS, and the main VPS was down, the mail would be sent to my other VPS's.
I just don not like the fact there is a single point of failure!
I do have WHM managed Weekly and Monthly backups of all cPanel accounts etc.
i am currently using Ultimahosts.net shared hosting, and i am more than happy with them. Their support & DotnetPanel are two best things.
Now i am planning to move my sites to Windows VPS. i cannot host it with them because their packages for VPS are bit expensive for me. As it starts from 69$.
i am looking for someone with their level of service & support. Can you guys suggest me any windows VPS solutions. i want to sleep peacefully after signing up.
i signed up one VPS with easyCGI last night and their sales person promise me to get it ready within 4 hours, after 16 hours from that i just canceled my order without using anything because they didn't process my order in 16 hours (i hope i will get my money back!).
i have read too many views about 1&1, gate.com,godady, solarvps, powervps,jodohost etc... but as i found some -ve comments i dont think i can carry on with them.
i am thinking of something solid & permanent. i dont wanna to move my sites every 2 months ........
i am looking something around 50$. Thanks in advance for any good suggestions. Please do not reply any marketing/sales stuff. i am looking for genuine feedback.
As many of hosts doesn't offer too much SQL so i am thinking something with 512MB RAM and running SQL express on the same machine.
we have about 95 linux server with Cpanel and we use the backup solution in whm and send file on two Dell 2900 with 8 HD 250Gb sata in raid5 but we see that the backup servers are really slow in the data transfer i think that the raid 5 and all the ftp session slow it, what server backup solution do u can suggest for this structure?
we have about 100 servers in colocation with a 200mbps connecetion, every server have install a software firewall on, this night we got a DDoS (4 hours down) and naturally we was unable to find the source or destination of attack so now we have think to add a firewall solution on the connection, can u give me a good firewall solution for this structure? we have think on a cisco pix 525 but seem to be expensive 10.000$
i want to kill apache/http and restart it again automatically. i need this because sometime we are not in front of the server to fix an overload issue immediately, which can affect a server very badly. i believe many of us already face this kind of situation and hope there is some kind of script or way to do this.
I have a client who wants a bulletproof video feature for his information/news site.
What's the best bet? Some of the FMS companies I've looked at give you 500 simultaneous streams for like $900/mo. What happens when #501 logs on? This is a series of sports events where they expect peaks on certain days, then long periods in between with lower, but still steady, traffic.
I have a dedicated server with Dual Xeon, 2 GB RAM, SATA Raid 0 and 10 mpbs port. When i checked from WHM i see, my RAM is never more than 20% used. I have a forum (phpBB) and few blogs which gets somewhere around 30,000 visits per day (forum + blog total visitors).
Now the problem is sometimes my site takes pretty much time to load despite memory load is not more than 20%?
Now if i add another site with even 1000 visits per day, the other sites seems to be highly affected.
Will my site performance improve if i upgraded to 100mbps port?
We are looking for a provider to host a secondary MX in the UK, It will be designed to act as a failover for 500 days for a maximum of 10 days whilst a replacement primary MX is sourced.
This service would need to stay live all of the time and we need the following: UK Based Spam Assasin ClamAV Managed Service with SLA and 24 hour support cover. The Ability ro relay a specific domain to a specific IP address.
We would be willing to add new domains and IP addresses if we are shown how to do this. All of the management and maintenance of this service would need to be completed by the company supporting it.
We have very little experience with Linux and this is why we would like to outsource this.