Got a Vps Server Today!

[Crabcake Johnny]

$50 a month? Really? My site gets 10K to 15K hits per month and I honestly don't know if that's a lot of hits or not for a site that uses shared hosting but pull up Insurance Training & Education - Agent Navigator and tell me if you like the loading time. I pay $120 a year.

Maybe more relevant is to pull up one of my video pages: http://agentnavigator.com/health_videos.php - loads fast for me.

 

[Mark]

$50 a month? Really? My site gets 10K to 15K hits per month and I honestly don't know if that's a lot of hits or not for a site that uses shared hosting but pull up Insurance Training & Education - Agent Navigator and tell me if you like the loading time. I pay $120 a year.

Maybe more relevant is to pull up one of my video pages: Health Insurance Training: Video Library - loads fast for me.

It is not for just a website. I"m working on something big for my father.

It will eat up a lot of server memory and space.


My godaddy hosting plan can push most of my websites okay. Shared plan can handle a normal website okay.

But when I start using programs and sql databases, it just freezes up.

I saw how good the server did on Adam's F.E. quoting engine with the same company and he recommend it.

 

[Guest]

All I know is vps is a lot better than godaddy shared hosting.

Smoke signals are faster and more reliable than GoDaddy! Every 7th grader (public school) geek-kid knows that!!!

 

[FEX Quotes]

I'm not familiar with ServInt but it looks like a pretty good company and their pricing is right in line for what they offer. You can get a bit cheaper out there, but cheap is hardly ever "good" in this biz.

Actually their pricing is very reasonable when you consider the whole package -- service, hardware, bandwidth, network and management.

Curious how you found them. I'm always interested to learn how people make the decision as to where to put their websites.

I recommended Servint to Mark and countless others as I have been using their services for many years; and I do so without any expectation of remuneration.

The system they use is CentOS which is the open-source version of Red Hat Enterprise. It would not be my first choice for a server OS but it would be in my top 8. CentOS was really designed as a desktop OS and is not as well suited for servers as are other flavors of Linux or Unix, in my (very subjective) opinion. Why? It is not built (optimized) for speed and that's what you want on a server. It will work OK as a VPS where there are not that many users on the hardware but probably not so well as a shared server if they overload it with users... or one heavy-hitter (porn) site.

I really do not want get myself involved with this debate, but I will say this. Do not kid yourself when saying that CentOS or RHE can not comfortably handle volume. I have personally worked on sites running on top of CentOS that are doing well in excess of 1 million uniques per day!

The reason Servint as well as many other hosting companies are using CentOS is one word - Cpanel

Cpanel has become the the defacto standard for the administration of web services and Cpanel's development has been optimized for this particular flavor of *nix

My list:

1. FreeBSD
2. Debian
3. Slackware
4. Arch
5. Ubuntu
6. CentOS
7. SUSE
8. Fedora

This is not carved in stone. Ask 10 geeks on their rankings and you will get 11 answers!!! It was never more true that YMMV.

Again, not a debate I wish to engage in but if you take Cpanel out of the equation, You are right on the money with FreeBSD at the top of the list but I personally would not put Fedora at #8.

What I didn't see in the specs was whether you were getting your own SQL database server or if you would be using a shared one with others on the shared VPS server... or perhaps one running on a dedicated machine somewhere.

A VPS for all intents and puposes is a dedicated server. The term VPS stands for Virtual Private Server. All the resources and services one would normally have on a true dedicated server are available on a VPS.

When correctly configured, a VPS is allocated a specific amount of the host machine's physical resources and the VPS operates in it's own isolated container without influence from the other VPS's on the machine.

Think of it this way. A true dedicated server is a single family home while a VPS is a condo unit within a larger building.

What really confuses people is the term "server". It is often associated with hardware, but in a web hosting environment this is not 100% accurate. There are many servers configured as software on physical computer built to run on a network. A web server is NOT hardware. A mail server is NOT hardware. An FTP server is NOT hardware. I will save this for future discusssion if anyone really cares...

 

[Guest]

Do not kid yourself when saying that CentOS or RHE can not comfortably handle volume.

Yes... almost any flavor of Linux can be configured to handle volume. I know how to do that myself having been an experienced Linux guru up until about 5 years ago when I moved to the Apple platform from Linux. The problem is that CentOS comes with a lot of "fluff" that the sysadmin has to "cut through" to make the system a speed-demon, while if they used a Debian flavor or Arch or Slack which are bare-bones out of the box, it's a lot less work.

That said, my long time host, Pair Networks (where I have a QS-1 dedicated server) uses Ubuntu on their VPS servers, but FreeBSD on their dedicated. I don't know why they chose Ubuntu but I understand why they picked Linux vs. FreeBSD for running a virtual system under it. I don't think virtualization is "there yet" for FreeBSD.

The reason Servint as well as many other hosting companies are using CentOS is one word - Cpanel

Well, I guess. But Plesk is also very popular. PairNetworks wrote their own which is quite good. Most users don't spend a whole lot of time with the control panel.

Cpanel has become the the defacto standard for the administration of web services and Cpanel's development has been optimized for this particular flavor of *nix

I didn't know Cpanel was designed especially for Red Hat... I thought they just had one that was optimized for hardware running VPS servers.

A VPS for all intents and puposes is a dedicated server. The term VPS stands for Virtual Private Server. All the resources and services one would normally have on a true dedicated server are available on a VPS.

It shares the processor with all the other VPS users on the box. If you have a couple of heavy users it will still affect the others. But there are ways of load-balancing... but that is beyond my pay grade.

 

[Franz Kafka]

Hope you're taking notes, Mark.

 

[arnguy]

Mark, when you understand all this cyber babble, please write a book about it. You are the author of several informative books, so I trust you as a good source for information!

 

[Mark]

Hope you're taking notes, Mark.

This all went way over my head!

Mark, when you understand all this cyber babble, please write a book about it. You are the author of several informative books, so I trust you as a good source for information!

I do businesses besides insurance. Before I got into insurance, I did computers. But that was in 1998. I feel like that I don't know crap about computers now.

I'm going to read a book on sql databases soon.

 

[FEX Quotes]

I agree 110% with the RHE/CentOS fluff. This is the reason FreeBSD is my favorite. In fact, when Mark reached out to me for assistance with his new VPS, it almost killed me to NOT perform my obligatory initial setup of a newly deployed server

Your mention of Pair Networks brought a huge smile to my face. Is Kevin Martin still there? Though it has to be at least 15 years, it seems like yesterday that I met Kevin and Pair Networks. I was one of Kevin's very first customers at Pair. He introduced me to advanced Perl techniques and I introduced him and his new business to what it takes to bring down an entire network. He and I both were amazed (but not surprised) at the insatiable global demand for useless data I was pumping through his pipe 24/7. Due to the conflict with my useage and their newly formed business model, we soon parted ways...

Yes... almost any flavor of Linux can be configured to handle volume. I know how to do that myself having been an experienced Linux guru up until about 5 years ago when I moved to the Apple platform from Linux. The problem is that CentOS comes with a lot of "fluff" that the sysadmin has to "cut through" to make the system a speed-demon, while if they used a Debian flavor or Arch or Slack which are bare-bones out of the box, it's a lot less work.

That said, my long time host, Pair Networks (where I have a QS-1 dedicated server) uses Ubuntu on their VPS servers, but FreeBSD on their dedicated. I don't know why they chose Ubuntu but I understand why they picked Linux vs. FreeBSD for running a virtual system under it. I don't think virtualization is "there yet" for FreeBSD.

Well, I guess. But Plesk is also very popular. PairNetworks wrote their own which is quite good. Most users don't spend a whole lot of time with the control panel.

I didn't know Cpanel was designed especially for Red Hat... I thought they just had one that was optimized for hardware running VPS servers.

It shares the processor with all the other VPS users on the box. If you have a couple of heavy users it will still affect the others. But there are ways of load-balancing... but that is beyond my pay grade.

 

[somarco]

I must have wandered into the wrong room. Can anyone tell me where the restrooms are?