lets just say the CPU, NICs and memory are all top notch products.
Which would you, the consumer, prefer?
250GB storage on 7.2K SATAII drives
or
120GB storage on 15K SAS drives
Both running RAID5
Taking into consideration both solutions would cost the same, which do you choose and why?
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.
just want to share some negative experience with bluehost, thoughts on overselling, and to ask for an advice on what hosting to move to ... Bluehost.
Here's what is going on on the server box that I have an account on. I can see this via the ssh account that bluehost gave me.
The box is 8 CPUs, with average load about 15-25%, though sometimes it goes up to 70. It's got about 700G of space for the users. There are 26 registered users (including myself), but these are only those who have asked for ssh access; since I guess not everybody asks, there just as well may be another 100 or so users.
Now, bluehost offers 1.5TB (or is it 15TB?) storage. Since we've got 0.7TB for at least 26 of us, the conclusion is obvious: nobody can get the promised amount.
Now this is where the problem begins. Apparently one of the users of the box has attempted to make good of the 1.5TB promise; as a result the box ran out of space.
The consequences you can imagine.
The consequences for all of the users of the box - not only for the one who made it run out of space. I was actually using only a couple of gigs, and when the box went full my accounts started loosing emails, my cpanel was shut down and so on.
To add up to the trouble, bluehost didn't react until I (and perhaps others) complained. And when the support did pay attention to the problem, it was only to add some 20-30G (may be they just cleaned up something, I can't say).
Overselling.
Now it becomes clear to me that overselling is a problem not only for those who try to actually use the promised amount of space and bandwidth, but to everybody. Moreover, if a single
user tries to use all his space it already leads to troubles.
I was imagining before that these providers have huge servers, so that if one actually uses his 1.5TB others won't notice - it's only if many try to do this there's a problem. How very naive. Indeed it's hard to imagine a single server box on which somebody using 1.5TB could pass unnoticed. As it happens with bluehost, a server can't accommodate even one such user.
Finally, I'm in need of recommendations.
I'm looking for a hosting to move to. In fact I only have a couple of static websites with about 20 emails on them. However, it appears to be not such an easy task to find a reasonable host. The point is that I like to have at least 2-3G of space- so that I wouldn't need to delete any emails and worry about the space in general. What is on offer, however, is either 200M for smth like 7$/month, or these unlimited TB from oversellers. Somehow there seem to be nothing in between. Thus what I need is perhaps a moderate overseller. One who can't allow everybody to use all their space at the same time, but can tolerate reasonably expectable increases of usage.
In short: is there a hosting provider that can give me: 3G space, 2 domains allowed to host, ~3G bandwidth a month, 30 or so emails. And all this for 5-8$?
I received my login details to my new VPS last night and set up apache, php and mysql without any real problems.
I'm looking to move my client websites away from Dreamhost to this VPS, but before I do so I need to figure out how to set up pop3. Specifically I need to set up pop3 accounts with exactly the same usernames and passwords as on Dreamhost so I don't have to phone my clients up and walk them through configuring Outlook again!
So, I'd to be able to log into pop3 with either m123456 (random number) or 'email@domain.com'. This way I'll be able to set it all up and then just flick the dns record over to the vps
Can anyone recommend a way of doing this?
my "Google Webmaster Tools" the other day and came across this in web crawl errors:
URL: [url]
Detail: General HTTP error
Problem Detected On: Sep 13, 2008
"Last updated Sep 16"
Does this mean it detected the problem on sep 13 and it has tried to access the page since then and has been unable to? I've been able to access the page fine between the 13th and 16th?
Anything i should be worried about? "Google last accessed my homepage on the 5th"...
What are some of the general questions your customers have with HyperVM?
And a VPS in general.
I'm getting a dedicated Windows server for my business web site (a classifieds service similar to AutoTrader, with e-commerce capabilities). I need to get someone for routine administration, but I don't know the first thing about it.
What are the general tasks that need to be done on a regular basis with a Windows host server? How many hours per week can I expect a professional admin to spend on these tasks? Starting out, the traffic will be on the low end, but I'm expecting 100,000+ users within a few months.
Quite a general question here
I have a website www.littlemissthrifty.com - the domain name is registered with weycrest but it is hosted with bravenet pro,
when i go into the control panel at Weycrest it says Domain has frame forwarding to the URL www.dis-counts.co.uk
I dont want it to be forwarded anywhere, does this matter as it is already hosted somewhere else? or could it cause problems for search engines crawling if the domain name points somewhere else?
The short: Professional, honest, and competent. I've learned that when dealing with VPSes, if you want to be fancy you need to tolerate problems. While Icertainly had some interesting issues [url] with Ubiquity, besides a few of them they fall into the categories of 'stuff happens' and 'should get a dedicated server, instead'. It ran two of the most active adult communities in the world without a hitch. Except my members are addicted to them like crack and 15 minute lag issues are the end of the world for some : )
So now, four months after I left Acceleratedweb for Ubiquity [url]I am the proud owner of an overstock server from Ubiquity and am reviewing their VPS.
As the first link suggests - it wasn't my first shot with Ubiquity. I think that says a lot for making "If you ever want to come back." offers. They now have $125/month of my money, most of that guaranteed (I dislike having only one host so am probably going to try poking Futurehosting again after Lenny becomes a VPS install option there, or maybe Steadfast).
I really appreciate Ubiquity's patience with me while I learned how to self manage. I've come to detest control panels and have gotten rather good at it, especially after custom designing my own LAMP stack (handled over four thousand php page landings and forty thousand queries a minute from seventy connections... bad AJAX is a good DDOS simulation).
Typical Response Time: Ten minutes or so - pretty fast, though resolution can often be longer. The clock on vz010 is off by six hours on reboot. Very annoying.
General attitude: Not as individually detailed as AcceleratedWeb was, but this is okay, since I know more on my own now. Beyond that, they are generally pleasant compared to other VPS host's I've tried.
Server ping: Originally around 15 milliseconds. 40 now, and the same to my new server -
I wonder if echo requests or replies are throttled. I'm not sure if I'm a good judge here - the forums rarely take more than 2 mbps during any given minute unless I'm downloading a backup.
Server uptime: There was a crash a few days after I moved the forums to the VPS. November was around 99% with that, but otherwise it's closer to 99.8%, if you count occasional local outages. There is a router in between their network and their VPSes which sometimes goes haywire, which seems to be the main culprit.
Server speed: This is a bit tricky. Ubiquity only gives you access to one core. This may seem bad, but occasionally VPS members get hoggy, do you want one person out of thirty bringing your VPS down or one person out of four?
In the end, raw disk bandwidth is what counts for performance for me. The VPS server itself has a monstrous amount of RAM making this, usually, a non-issue. Occasionally though another VPSer would do something disk-heavy enough for us to suffer. "Get dedicated" <- we just did, that's why this review is here : )
Security: Ubiquity only took my root password when trying to diagnose the mystery disappearing disk space issue. They run a RAID and perform daily backups, and their control and billing software has no obvious security issues (though their billing software is plenty funky in other ways).
Price: Futurehosting is a bit more expensive but offers the future protect deal, while Ubiquity only permits one backup via the control panel. Pretty competitive for what is offered and allowed.
----
I did have issues with Ubiquity. Their DNS servers fritz occasionally. There was the mysterious disk issue that caused me to leave them in the first place. The server crash really made me grit my teeth. The system clock on vz010 gets set ahead 6 hours on reboot - very annoying (and the butt of a lot of time travel jokes on my forums). Even though that only happened twice. There are lag spike issues, but it never brought the forums down after the first time and even then it was resolved within 15 minutes.
Something I've learned and made it a bit of a mantra. Tolerate mistakes, cheap, do what you want - pick two. Or better, a good balance between them.
The support staff is both professional and, in general, technically competent. If something is over someone's head, it happens, it gets forwarded on and is generally dealt with. The only thing I really blame them for is letting vz010's clock be off for six hours after I notified them - but they were apparently rather busy.
----
I looked over dozens of VPSes for the criteria I wanted, and paid for several.
I needed a US host, in a fairly liberal state - I do not want my server hijacked by puritan authorities as had happened in Florida and Pennsylvania. I needed to host adult content, with an irc policy that makes sense. I needed to run Debian Lenny, and manage it on my own.
Out of all of them, Ubiquity was the only one that let me do everything I needed to, reliably and with confidence, for a price I could comfortably afford.
Not sure what else could matter, in the end. : )
the Error Code is :SQLSTATE[HY000]: General error: 1030 Got error -1 from storage engine Knowledge base says I am out of storage but I am not .But the output of command df -h returns this:
Code:
Filesystem Size Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/vda3 825G 673G 110G 86% /
tmpfs 9.8G 0 9.8G 0% /dev/shm
/dev/vda1 477M 59M 393M 13% /boot
Restarting sw-cp-server doesn't shows any error.However , I was getting some problems with mysql socket and I wasn't able to use the plesk still then currently a custom installation of phpmyadmin lets me access the databases but I can't access any of my websites either (Wordpress). Apache returns 504 Gateway Error .
I am having some serious speed issues with my 1Gbit server at FDC. After opening a ticket, they've simply dismissed it as a server configuration problem. However I am convinced it isn't because certain ISP's (usually universities) get good speeds, usually 700kb/sec but the vast majority of my users get between 20-50 kb/sec and it's causing a lot of complaints.
Furthermore I have other servers with FDC which are 100mbit which perform better than my 1 Gbit one. There are no server bottlenecks (CPU/RAM/HDD), since I've closely monitored them (PRTG) and they aren't even heavily utilised. So the problem is with the network at some point.
Speed Test : [url]
where abouts you are downloading from, your ISP and net connection. Wget's from servers are also welcome as are traceroutes.
Not sure if this is beyond anyones experience here or knowledge but I thought I would give it a try here and see if I can get any insight on this.
Recently I had to work with a IBM xSeries 226 server which runs two SCSI Ultra320 drives in it at this time. I've actually purchased two extra drives for it but the distributor sent me the wrong drives for that server. Now they are saying its my fault of not proving them with more information but I think stating that I have two SCSI Ultra320 drives would be enough for them to send the right ones.
Now they sent me the IBM SAS Serial ATA SCSI drives, so I was wondering if anyone in here has enough knowledge to possibly provide me on the insight on the solution I think might be right to still use these two drives and not being stuck with a $2000 bill and two drives that I don't use.
My solution would be to buy one of the support or any Adaptec SAS Serial ATA SCSI controller cards and put it into one of the available PCIe slots and connect the drives. I've tried contacting IBM regarding this but they want $200 bucks just to say "yeah it will work or no it wont".
Logically I think it would work, the only thing I'm afraid is that let say I spend $400 - $1000 bucks on a controller card and it doesn't work they way you would think, then I'm out $3000 bucks. (drives are $2000 + $1000 for a controller card).
I just clicked on the Lunarpages webhosting ad at the top of this forum. Not really hunting for hosting myself but regularly suggest places to clients.
I noticed something strange. Their business account has unlimited storage:
# Unlimited Storage
# 3500 Gigs Data Transfer
For 21.95 per month. That's more space than you get with their virtual private servers.
Now we know that's not possible, machines have limits right? I've seen other hosting providers offer unlimited features as well - and since all servers have limited space and bandwidth abilities how can they offer these types of services with out the FTC cracking down for false advertising?
Beyond that, I don't recommend any service that offers unrealistic plans. Am I just overreacting since it seems more and more common?
** note, this isn't an attack on Lunarpages. They were there and it made this thought pop in my head.
I just like to thank Ryan from Aquarius Storage for helping me the other day set up my test account and test the server's loading time with my website. I now have fully transferred from my previous host, PeachyDandy, as my site loaded very slowly. I have now cancelled my account with PeachyDandy.
With Aquarius Storage my website now loads twice as fast as before. Site loading time according to Pingdom:
PeachyDandy - Average of 6 Seconds
Aquarius Storage - Average of 3 Seconds
Website - Mango Chico
Great job with the support Aquarius Storage! Moreover, the staff are very approachable and welcoming!
If you need speed, Aquarius Storage, is your hosting solution
Thumbs up Aquarius!
My site is on forumotion right now. I want to move it and have it hosted somewhere. It is a local Mustang club. I have read all the problems with the oversold sites. I have also looked at others. The big issue is i dont rally know how much space I need. This is the site southshorestangs.com. What it will have is that forum and probably a few webpages. It is still only a month old so it will keep growing hopefully. i just dont want to get way more than I will need.
View 14 Replies View RelatedDoes anyone know of a good reliable and redundant method of organizing clustered storage? I know that IBM has GPFS - has anyone actually used it? Do they charge a crap load for it?
View 6 Replies View RelatedWe 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.
I've been with imhosted for a few years now. I have had horrible experiences with them with a lot of outages and lost data (2 days ago lost 6 months of data, they deny anything happened and have no backups).
I have been meaning to change hosts for a long time now but just haven't got the energy to wade through google trying to guess which have good SEO and which are the real deal.
Any recommendations for a host with the following features would be appreciated:
- PHP
- dedicated IP that isn't blacklisted
- fairly fast PHP processing time for some CPU intensive scripts
- MySQL (just a few needed)
- IMAP
Quality of support and uptime are important and I would easily pay an extra $10 / month for it. My budget is up to $25 / month or so.
I'd like to find the cheapest way to store about 10 to 20 TBytes of data. After looking at some tape drives it seems like it'd be cheaper to get two or three big towers and fill them with large SATA drives attached to 3-ware controller cards.
View 6 Replies View Relatedwe want start with a new infrastructure for VPS service, we have think to use Dell Blade and a CX300 storage with Iscsi, i would your impression on this configuration, i am not sure on the velocity access btw blade nic and storage, do u think that is enough 1gbs port to connect each blade on the storage? how about NFS system? i dont would get trouble with access performance,
View 0 Replies View RelatedIm recently purchase vps from aquarius storage
[url]
im choose plan A4
its very good price for vps with xeon processor
and im get my vps setup on 2 hours included cpanel
usually im bought vps need at least 24 hours cause waiting cpanel license and etc. but aquarius only need two hours
than i submit ticket to get my whm to be setup and optimize and install some software.
and they do fast response and do it .
i just cant believe it will get this kind of services.
its real FULLY MANAGE VPS
Network File Storage (NFS), does anyone use it or find it useful?
From what I see are advantages:
- Raid redundant
- Good backup
- Cheap extra space
Cons:
- slower speeds read/write speeds?
Looking for someone to add on and change my point of view on NFS. Also if you like NFS what is a good model for us to get. We are currently looking at the the Dell PowerVaults...
i want to write this small review for Aquarius Storage i been with them a few weeks now and they are great , great prices and the best of all great support , i ran into a few issues at first , issues i could resolve my self if ihave done further reading and they were nice and help me and even pointed me into some usefull information and tutorials thats great helping customers manage their own vps insted of charging ridiculos prices for simple task like i seen in the past with other providers , keep the good work guys
my site is digitalxeon.net is still on development so there no relevant information on the site yet
thanx Aquarius Storage keep it up!
Support: 10 out of 10
Reliability: 10 out of 10
Value: 100 out of 10
Overall: a solid 10 out of 10
Wondering what kind of storage hardware server builders are using to keep organized? I am currently storing HDD, RAM, PSU, CPUs, and other various parts on shelves and it gets disorganized and messy very quick.
I found this product for HDD and may order some to help organize HDDs:
[url]
Anyone know of similar products or good shevling / cabinets that are computer parts friendly?
I need a hosting with 5-10 GB Hard-drive Space and about 500 GB of bandwidth (maybe a bit less). Without any features (apache, php, etc). I need only Ftp to upload and share video files.But not very expensive, not more than $10-$20.
View 12 Replies View RelatedI run several sites and all of them are hosted at invision. The main reason for having my sites hosted there is that my sites are "forum centered" and I'm very happy with the service that I have got over the last few years from them, so I don't want to change that.
However, I now wish to expand and provide my users with a file repository. The problem is, whilst hosting my sites at invision is fine, hosting my files there would be quite expensive...
Thus, I'm now looking for a host to host my files and nothing else. (I run chess sites, so I'll be providing my users with files and possibly a gallery. All legal material, of course).
I don't need any download manager or anything of the kind. Invision forums actually has its own download manager, and I can have my files hosted externally (i.e. other than on my site).
Thus, I'm looking for a host that offers specific packages for what I am looking for - I would not need scripting or any 'fancy' features, just file storage with FTP access.
How much space? around 1 GB, possibly 2 in the future, maybe 3 or 4 if I add the gallery one day.
And bandwidth, as people will be downloading files from my site.
I've been looking around, but it's just so difficult: they all offer webhosting services for people who need to have their sites hosted, etc. and that's not what I need.
Any recommendations?
I don't have any fixed budgets, my focus will be on price, speed and reliability. Preferably a hosting company which has been around for a while and has good reviews.
I need to put a proposal for a client who has 20 TB data storage (files/images).
Will propose PHP/mysql - mysql for meta data of files and other authentication etc. Application/mysql could just be ~10 MB.
The storage would increase (incrementally) ~ 1 TB per year.
And data needs stored at a different place for Disaster Recovery point of view.
Need to figure storage costing.
Please give me some pointers:
a) How to find high storage hosting provider?
b) Has any one experimented with Cloud Computing, and if so any ball park potential costing? I attempt S3 and could not figure costing.
c) or any other suggestion.
I have a website that is approx 50GB, that I essentially would like to take offline for a while. Obviously, while the site is offline, I don't want to be paying for my server.
Can anyone let me know of some options to "store" this mammoth of a site. Downloading it locally is not an option, so it needs to stay in the cloud for the lowest possible price.
what kind of bandwidth i need and what kind of space i need for a site that experiences about 25000 hits a month and file size of about 700mb. the site is purely content and images and correspondence is done by forms.
i dont want to go to big but also dont want to under size my customer as uptime and speed is important (im looking at dedicated servers)
I setup an iSCSI target and two iSCSI initiators but I am having some trouble sharing the storage.
I partitioned the drive when I used the first initiator, a 1TB partition, I mounted it without any issues, it showed up in df -h.
Now I went to mount the iSCSI target on the second initiator, I mounted it fine, the partition I made on the first initiator was recognized on this one, however when I add files to either or, the changes aren't recognized on the other initiator. Any ideas why this might be?
I put 1GB of files in one initiator and I ran the df -h command on the other, and it still had the same amount of free space.
