We just recently were kind of forced to go from a true dedicated server to a VPS type server and my question is a simple one.
When it comes to SQL databases is the VPS powered server just a secure as a dedicated type server?
I have a 'complex' situation, if you will. The site I run has free access to a variety of server hardware. Sitting under my desk, I currently have:
1. Dual Xeon 5345 (quad core, 2.33GHz) with 8GB memory, mid-tower
2. Quad Opteron 8xx (dual core, 2.2GHz) with 16GB memory, 3U
3. Dual Xeon 5160 (dual core, 3GHz) with 4GB memory, mid-tower
We also have the appropriate licenses for Windows and MSSQL (which is what we use).
I am currently on a shared host that we'd like to move away from. We would like to have the ability to run both a production and a development environment. We'd also like to be able to offer web-hosting to a couple of other small sites...
So what I'm wondering is whether it really makes sense to colo. Honestly, it seems like we'll get a lot more bang for our buck versus dedicated. Most dedicated servers that are under 200 could only be described as sad and pathetic. However, they may be enough for what we need....
Looking for a dedicated unmetered server to stream movies and audio for over 500 visitors a day. Anybody knows any place that is good?
Also, what kind of hardware specifications would be OK for me - in terms of speed and memory? And would we be OK with a 10mbit port or 100?
Would I survive on a dedicated server with a shared bandwidth?
I have a lot of experience with VPSs and recently have been working with dedicated servers but my partner and I are going to be providing VPSs and my main concern is securing the node the VPSs will be on. Would I secure it like a normal dedicated server?
I'm worried that if I secured it like I would my dedicated servers it would affect the VPS clients hosted on there. Any assistance is appreciated, even if it's just a recommendation for a management company or single user who could assist us.
if anyone has insight or comments about Fusion-io's ioDRIVE versus their ioXtreme drive. If you do, I would appreciate reading your thoughts on this.
The ioDRIVE is their enterprise product while the ioXtreme drive is being marketed to the consumer market. Both seem to be extremely impressive products.
My main question is whether or not an ioXtreme is suitable for web server use. The ioDRIVE is made for server use and is much more expensive, so is not only a bit less attractive because of the cost but also a bit out of my reach, financially, at this point.
So, what do you think about the ioXtreme being used in a web server? Any reason that this might be a bad idea?
Would Intel's X25-E be a better solution than the ioXtreme? The ioXtreme is PCIe based & the X25-E is a SATA drive.
I heard many webmaster said that softlayer is better hosting on management. is that true?
View 5 Replies View RelatedI have been running my sites on dedicated servers from The Planet for 4 years now. I go through about 500,000 page views per day with a fairly intensive web app (1000+ queries/s). Mosso keeps coming up and it is really interesting me. The promised peace of mind would be a relief and I often have trouble with site lag during peak times even with fairly high end servers. I am wondering if Mosso could work for me or if it is just too good to be true.
I searched the forums, but most of what I found was from 2006 when it first came out, wondering if I can get any info from people who have had experience or heard things more recently. I am really interested about loading times. I read from a lot of people that they experienced slow load times for pages (again these posts were at least a year old), but I viewed some sites hosted on Mosso and they seemed quite fast to me.
Just signed up for a new FutureHosting VPS last night. Their pricing is very good, and the reviews generally kind to them on WHT.
I paid for the $44.99 account with 30 domain Plesk. They have a 35% discount on at the moment that made the package very tempting. Guarantees 768mb RAM, 30gb disk space etc.
Account activated several hours ago.
Took me 1-2 minutes to establish an SSH connection and authorization.
Trying to login to Plesk control panel for the first time has taken 6-7 minutes and it's still loading as I write this.
Load average: 2.01, 1.51, 0.82
Mem: 786432k total, 91000k used, 695432k free, 0k buffers
Swap: 0k total, 0k used, 0k free, 0k cached
Note all I'm doing is running top and trying to access Plesk.
This doesn't look too impressive to say the least.
I know this happens from time to time with most VPS solutions. I've probably been unlucky that I've hit a spike in server load at the precise moment I tried to use the account for the first time.
But anyone have any experiences with FutureHosting that suggest this could be an ongoing problem?
looks to me like they've stopped renewing domains; everything for me is intact but shortly after the renewal date the domain name doesn't work and the email addresses that come with the service don't work. i had 5 different emails for support for them, none of them work; ditto for any support phone numbers. Too bad, had 2 years of no problems.
i've contested the last payment made through paypal, don't expect that will do much good. don't really care, except it's a nuisance and some $ to move on. i also have a personal web site with them and that's working fine, probably will die when the year is up. i'm looking through the other services to find a safe inexpensive one.
I have been searching and searching for a solution. We are currently using one single vps to host some of our clients. We are finding more and more that we need to have some redundancy.
I have looked at using DNS failover using RSYNC/mysql replication etc with two servers, but just dont like the idea.
I have also looked at hosts like imountain etc that use h-sphere. I dont like this setup because services are split onto single machines. For example mail is done on one single server, therefor if that server is down, mail is down.
What I am looking for:
I am trying to stay in a budget of 150/month or less.
I would like to get one of the two options here:
option 1: two vps's or dedi's that technically act as one(a true cluster) then on top of that is OS and control panel and done. This solution doesnt allow for whole datacenter outages, or network issues.
option 2: Two geographically placed vps or dedi's that are somehow either load balanced, or failover.
Ultimately our goal is to have high uptime, but we dont really have much server load.
Basically failover is ok as loads are always low anyway, but if we are paying big $$ it would be nice to have it load balanced.
Please let me know if my expectations are way to high or my price is way too low. I need to find a solution here somehow and if I cant find anything will most likely just go with DNS failover.
which advertises unlimited bandwidth and unlimited space for only 3.95 a month!?
So their website is unlimitedhostweb dot com
Does anyone have experience with this company and do they really deliver what they advertise for that insane price?
I've never used windows hosting before but I have just taken over hosting a site for a new client and the website is written in ASP. One of my developers has installed the website and back-end on a Webfusion shared windows hosting account, the site runs okay but there is an admin section that isn't working at the moment as the script uses something called 'aspcompat'.
View 5 Replies View RelatedAre there any hosts on the net with reasonably priced true multi site hosting*?
I'd host something like 5-6 small wordpress & blog sites, no special diskspace or bw requirements.
I know Site5 offers something like this, but I'd like something with over 80% uptime
(* By this I mean each site should have its own cpanel & the sites should be completely separate, due to the fact that I'm lazy & don't want to set up domain pointers or whatever they are called.)
Does anyone use Acronis True Image Server Worksation Edition instead of the expensive Server Edition ?
View 6 Replies View RelatedI am trying to get my own set of ips from ARIN, and I need to qualify under the multi-home. My understanding of this setup is that I have 512 or more ips that I am using and that I have multiple routes in from the internet from at least 2 providers. Right now where I am coloing at I just have servers and no routers (only the ones that are provided by the co-location). In order to setup a true multi-home for my org will I need to have my own routers/switches and such to accomplish this?
View 12 Replies View RelatedRecently I saw an advertisement about Surf Speedy Servers [url] and I am interested in one of their VPS servers.
[url]
However when I searched for reviews in WebHostingTalk and other websites, I got only REALLY bad and REALLY good reviews regarding Surf Speedy Servers (mostly at webhostingjury.com).
Can you tell me if you had any good or bad experience with Surf Speedy, and what are their problems?
We are seeking for a new dedicated servers company.
Actually we have 2 windows servers(1Database
Just wondering if there is some 'plugin' for MRTG which will e-mail or send an sms if certain conditions are true (bandwidth exceeded on some server /device)?
View 1 Replies View RelatedIt seems the HighPoint-RocketRAID 3120 is the cheapest 2 port hardware SATA2 RAID out there with advertised windows, linux, freebsd and mac support based on Marvell IOP and 128MB RAM. They say the drivers have been backported to centos redhat/kernels already.
Does anyone have any experiences with this card?
References :
[url]
[url]
[url]
I am getting into the dedicated server market and have a question...
I would like to get access to an entire Class C so 111.111.111.xxx - is that standard or should I assume someone offering a dedicated server with 1 IP only is giving say 111.111.111.1 ?
What would be the cost of being able to allocate different sites on the same class C?
For a server with Xeon 3060 + 2 Gigs of RAM, which setup result would you choose to run at?
This is the normal load. At peak times, they would be more like:
Server Load: 0.07 / Memory Used 50%
Server Load: 0.40 / Memory Used 30%
Would a slightly higher CPU load be a better choice than having 50% of RAM used? We can choose either scenario based on installing eAccelerator, a PHP cacher.
I visited the colo space (1 cabinet) we obtained through an Equinix reseller. There was some confusion as initially we were going into DC2, but they put us into DC3 as that's where they had the space (they have a lot of cages in both DCs).
In the past, I had visited DC2 and it's clear the facility was purpose-built for Equinix. You can tell just by looking at it from the outside, but also inside.
Driving up to DC3 (on Chillum Place), I was first surprised to notice glass windows on the outside of the building (they have the reinforced walls inside of that I was told).
Apparently, the building was some other company's datacenter or offices, which Equinix then refitted their standard-build datacenter inside the building. They also have different man-traps (like a rotating door) compared to DC2, raised flooring (which is not used I was told), and lower ceilings.
I drove around the DC3 building, and the other half of it appears to be some other company's datacenter (based on the generators on the roof). Any idea who that is?
Is DC3 the same quality as DC2? It didn't quite "feel" like the quailty of DC2, but that's just an impression and not based on any empirical evidence. It's also a bit further out there, while DC2 and its new "siblings" (DC4/5) are all adjacent to each other (on Filigree Court).
With the reseller we are using, most of their bandwidth in DC3 cross-connects to their network equipment in DC2, and that's where they peer. That's another thing that makes me feel like DC3 is quite secondary.
Are my feelings unfounded, or should I push our reseller to find a cabinet for us in DC2?
Does anyone have input on either of these VPS hosts? Their plans are similar and prices are nearly identical, and I'm trying to figure out whether I should just flip a coin, or whether one edges the other out.
View 8 Replies View RelatedI was wondering which location is better for colocation?
Is one better than the other as far as bandwidth, power or accessibility?
How much faster is a Raptor 74GB 10,000rpm compared to a Seagate 250GB SATA-II 7200rpm? Both are priced the same. I'm comtemplating on which one to use for a database..go for more storage or a faster drive.
View 8 Replies View RelatedI'm in the process of preparing to install CentOS 5 on my server, and was wondering whether most people recommend going with the 64bit version or sticking with 32bit. My server's CPU is 64-bit capable (Xeon 3060 at SoftLayer), and I have previously run CentOS 4.4 64bit on it, though I did have some struggles from time to time getting things to work (following setup guides that tend to assume 32bit more often than not).
I'll be running just a standard setup of PHP 5, MySQL 5, and Apache 2, powering several moderate-traffic sites that run on the Drupal CMS (e.g. about 7000-10000 visitors per day total, though hopefully more in the future of course). I don't plan on running a control panel other than Webmin, though I might get DirectAdmin or similar in the future to make hosting some friends/clients a bit simpler.
Will going with 64bit offer any worthwhile advantage with this setup?
I am having trouble working out which host to choose for a new project.
I usually opt for Webmania or Heart Internet - they are excellent providers but Webmania now applies a bandwidth cap that may be too low and Heart's cheapest package does not provide sub-domains. I can't be sure whether 12GB will be big enough for a site that will contain galleries of high-res images (I have no prior experience with caps and traffic predictions are impossible at this time) and to get sub-domains from Heart means a £90 per year package (too much).
Streamline is one of the few good-value providers that do not cap bandwidth, but I have concerns about the effect that this may have on server speed given that it is bound to attract the kind of sites that are really heavy on bandwidth. This point was mentioned in an article recently.
If I take the last option, will I be hampering the performance of my site?
I'm having a tough time finding a discernible difference between the 2810 and the 2848, beyond the $1k price premium on the 2848. Can anybody speak to the benefits of the 2848 over the 2810?
View 5 Replies View Relatedprice wise I could switch server.
Currently:
Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 6700 @ 2.66GHz
2 core
Ram: 2GB
to:
Harpertown E5405 2.0GHz
4GB
quad core
RAM: 4GB
I'm not sure the quad core runs with 2.0GHZ versus 2.66GHz.
CentOS 32 bit.
all sites currently on the 6700 using mysql, server load in WHM shows ~1 (2).. just full weekly backup pushes it over 4.
Would be nice if somebody could comment.. would be the E5405 with 2.0 GHz faster, worth switching?
Pentium 4 2.8 versus Core2Duo E2180
Both are 1U machines with 1G of memory, 2000G of bandwidth, 160Gb harddrives.
Is there a significant difference in cost between these two servers?
Is there a significant diffence in power consumption between the two?
Is there a signifcant difference in cooling between the two servers?
Is there a signifcant difference if rackspace requirements?
I have seen quite a few users stack all their desktops together in the datacentre racks instead of using rack mounted servers.
Actually between rack mounted servers and desktop servers (with the same motherboard and parts) which will be better in the racks and why?