I (and my clients) have a few very small, simple-minded websites...a few php programs for simple forms fetch-and-forward. Is there much PRACTICAL difference between a Windows-based host and a Linux-based host?
View 3 RepliesI'm thinking of using one of my computers at home as a dedicated server to host my own sites, and I would like to get your opinion guys on whether that would be a practical thing to do or not.
Dedicated Server: I put together;
Intel Pentium Dual Core 2.8GHz
3GB DDR2
1TB Seagate HD
GeForce 9800 GX2 1GB
Gigabit LAN
Windows XP Pro / IIS 5.1
Smart Firewall/Router Symantec
APC Smart-UPS battery (Full 15 hrs.)
Dedicated Connection: Business account will run me $80 CDN/month;
Speed Download - Up to 16 Mbps
Speed Upload - Up to 1 Mbps
Transfer/month - 200 GB
IP Addresses - 2 dynamic & 1 reserved.
The Sites:
Both sites are Academic based - together they receive approx. 200,000 visits a month / 50 to 60 GB transfer and growing. I'm also in process of publishing a 3rd site, but over all, I anticipate the 3 sites transfer to hover around 100GB/mo unless Digg/StumbleUpon/Google all decide to have an orgy-traffic linkage at once and push it higher.
what is the difference b/w windows and linux hosting. which is better?
View 14 Replies View RelatedWhat is the difference?
Does it matter which one?
main differences between these two hosting types? What websites it is better to host on linux-based servers and what on windows ones?
View 13 Replies View RelatedThis makes me confused when signing up.
View 14 Replies View RelatedI am considering moving to dedicated server, what are risks with self managed server compared to managed?
Managed servers are very expensive for my needs.
With Windows 2003 server, there are comprehensive lists of what you need to do to secure the server before use. For Windows 2008, I wonder is there such a list? Or is it true as what I heard from Microsoft that it is already secured out of the box?
Anyone has any resources on the hardening or preparation of 2008 for server hosting uses?
I was actually curious about this since Windows 2008 version came out.
What is the difference between Windows media services on Windows 2003 and Windows 2008?
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 was wondering whats the difference between a windows server and a linux server. if a client asks me which one should they choose? which one is better? what should i tell them to go with
View 7 Replies View RelatedAlmost all dedicated server providers offer windows 2003 server free. Any suggestions to choose one way or the other?
Any major limitations either of these cases? I never worked on linux before, have basic experience on unix though.
Please compare reliability, resources (if problems) in terms of cost, extendability, etc.,
Does cPanel support windows?
I am thinking of limestone 8gb Q9300 server (64bit) with their 30% off deal.
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....
We're outgrowing our current bulk storage system and I'd like to solicit opinions.
With 2 TB disks and a 16 disk array, it's possible to have a single 28 TB volume (after deducting RAID5 parity overhead and a hot-spare disk). I've seen arrays from Aberdeen with 48 and 96 disks, for nearly 200 TB. Windows supports up to 256 TB per volume when 64K cluster sizes are used.
Our backup system uses a ton of storage space, and it would be far more convenient, and more efficient from a utilization standpoint, to access that space as a single volume.
Breaking it up into smaller chunks, such as 2 TB each, means we have to make a "best guess" on balancing actual need.
For example, if we assign 25 servers to each 2 TB volume for backup storage purposes, some volumes might only see 800 GB of consumption (remaining 1.2 TB allocated but not used) while other volumes might get 1.6 TB used (remaining 400 GB allocated but not used). Key concept: wasted space, because we have to over-estimate need to assure adequate headroom.
From the opposite viewpoint, if we had a sudden increase in need that exceeded the available space allocated to that volume, we'd have to move that server to a different volume. Key concept: increased admin workload to monitor and re-balance distribution as needed.
Now if we used one giant volume, there would be no guesswork, no "allocating more than we think is needed" for a bunch of small volumes. All servers share one huge common pot.
But there has to be a practical limit from a system-overhead standpoint. Our backup sets consist of a few multi-gigabyte files, so using 64K clusters will not cause much waste from slack space.
I'd like to get your opinions on maximum disk volume sizes from a practical standpoint.
How do I run a virtual instance of Windows server 2008 on my Linux dedi? Do I need to partition the server and create a VPS for this or can I run it on something like VMware? (Please look at my other thread here [url]t=857377 to learn more about my server, its resources and current config.)
Why would I want to do this? Because my primary desktop OS is still Vista Ultimate 64 and I've invested a lot in Windows-based software and hardware--too much to make a total switch to Linux. But, I don't want to invest more than I have to in order to run a Windows server that allows my business partner to access documents remotely or for us to share various files securely and privately and still serve my mostly Windows-based clients and colleagues. I'm one of, well, two people I know who even use Linux (at least at the OS level and know it).
Since my research shows I **can** do this on Centos 5, the responses that would be most useful to me would be those that focus on how I can do this successfully (even if it seems complicate; I can figure it out with help and/or direction) and what to consider or avoid when creating this virtual guest OS on my Linux dedi.
Differences between Websites & Domains and Webspaces
I'm a beginner in Plesk Panel and I've a "concept" question. So, which are the differences between Websites & Domains and Webspaces? There's some documentation about the definition of this three objects?
I want to restore a database from my repository. In the backup manager (root) I have Server repository & Personal FTP Repository. The personal repository I set to backup every day. The server repository I don't know where to set the backup option. There seems to be some random backups every 2 weeks or so.
In the personal ftp repository I have the backups of the last 7 days as tar files. When I want to radio button "Selected objects" it can not me highlighted. I am on plesk 12.0.18. (I ticked "Restore this backup despite the fact that it does not have a valid signature")In the server depository the files are .xml and there I can select what to restore but the backups are not current. I need the database from yesterday.How can I make my personal backups selectable?
During the installation of Plesk, at first it used the root password, and then had me create an "admin" user.
When I log in using either I don't see any difference in the UI or options. Is there a difference or a reason to use one over the other?
Or is it just to give someone access to admin Plesk without giving them full root password of the server itself?
I will be setting up a site which uses ASP.NET 1.1. I know versions 3.0/3.5 are available, but they are not yet V2.0 compliant. Anyway thst is not the issue - just context.
Would like your advice as to whether it would be better to host this site with a company who looks as though they are specialising in ASP; such as DiscountASP, or Softsyhosting, or go with a general Windows hoster such as Steadfast, Fluidhosting, or 3Essentials?
I know nothing about ASP, so I don't know whether it is not at all neccessary to have a host specifically knowledgable about it, as I am unlikely to ever have problems with it, OR; I will most certainly have to address ASP issues sometime, so it would be essential to have support who really knows ASP.
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?
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?
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 RelatedI 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.
price 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?