Heh, the performance comparison linked to in that article is kinda worthless since it leaves out RapidXen, one of the largest bare bones VPS providers.
Reality of budget VPS services
41–50 of 70 posts
Re: Reality of budget VPS services
#42Anyone care to follow this up with a brief article on the more expensive VPS providers? (such as A Small Orange) Are those of us on Linode, Rackspace Cloud, and Slicehost missing out at all?
Another +1 for Linode. I especially enjoy their DNS management which is included in the price (many providers don't offer/charge more for). They use each of their datacenter presences to redundantly host the DNS zones, so my domains have 5 name servers to fall back on across USA + Europe.
Shh, don't tell them, but given the'll host unlimited domain zone files I even use it to manage a few extra domains that have no zone entries pointing to a linode VPS. They don't seem to check/mind.
Re: Reality of budget VPS services
#43Can anyone else comment on experiences with Linode (and equivalent alternatives)? I'm considering moving a group of servers off expensive dedicated hosting ($400/server) to a VPS service. I've looked at Amazon EC2 but they don't seem to have a sweet spot for my needs.
I've been using Linode for a couple of years now and I love 'em.
Re: Reality of budget VPS services
#44Good article. I disagree with a few remarks. While there is certainly a huge amount of fanboyism surrounding buyvm, most of it comes from the stock scarcity. I personally run 3 vps' with them (first three plans) and the performance has always been far more than acceptable. I run an adult tube site that has exploded in popularity due to a fun domain name and being one of the first to post a leaked sex tape for a latin…
Is he.net bad for just a colo'd rack, rather than VPSs?
Well the VPS's are running on colo'd racks (and thus you're probably 2 or 3 steps of escalation further away from the DC operator).
Hurricane Electric in Fremont has had issues with power and previously with wide-scale IP block blacklisting due to widespread illegality (bot nets, etc) running on equipment in their Datacenter.
It might be fine now, I'm not sure, but there's a ton of DC's out there where this has NEVER been a problem, so I fail to see why I'd want to stick my assets there.
Re: Reality of budget VPS services
#45Heh, the performance comparison linked to in that article is kinda worthless since it leaves out RapidXen, one of the largest bare bones VPS providers.
Rapidxen is more expensive than Linode when you get to 512mb ram... that can't be budget :)
Re: Reality of budget VPS services
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you sure that's the right move to make? Do you no longer need the resources of even a single dedicated server? At even 2-4GB RAM requirement, you would not be saving money buying a VPS over renting a server. A Linode 4096, where you're sharing CPU and disk IO with all the other users on the physical server, is $159.95/mo. For $159/mo you could rent a Xeon 3230 quad core, 4GB RAM, 2x250GB HD server from Softlayer…
We deliver video content. We have a CDN that properly encodes and serves our content. All I need is to handle the HTTP requests for the "directory" of videos. A shared environment would probably be fine. All the 4GB servers seem to have most of their RAM dedicated to caching when I check what free -m gives me. Our physical disk space requirements are low. As I shift more of our content to the CDN, our bandwidth needs…
All I need is to handle the HTTP requests for the "directory" of videos.
Have you considered just using Amazon S3, especially now they offer full 'httpd'-like functionality (no more bucket XML listings if you try to visit the root of the domain).
http://aws.typepad.com/aws/2011/02/host-your-static-website-...
If you are running a CDN in front to stream the content, this sounds like the best solution to me. You could probably get away with Reduced Redundancy Storage too if you have backups.
Re: Reality of budget VPS services
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
It depends on your application. Every provider has their own stack running in the back, their own policies, and a unique set of existing users. This translates to unique environments that are more or less suitable for certain needs. My experience with EC2 is that you get more RAM for the buck when compared to Rackspace and others, but IO to disk and CPU is sub-par. As a result, I tend to prefer Rackspace who are also…
>> My experience with EC2 is that you get more RAM for the buck when compared to Rackspace and others, but IO to disk and CPU is sub-par. As a result, I tend to prefer Rackspace who are also big players in the open source space. Seconding this. And I'd recommend a hybrid solution if it's possible. Dedicated db server with some cloud webheads for your front end. I really think that's the best bang for your buck. Has a…
The ultimate hybrid is to find a budget VPS (or premium VPS) provider who is based in the same datacenter as your 'bare metal' servers. Granted VPS != cloud, but depending on your requirements you might get the same benefits.
The benefit here is that you can exchange data between servers/VPS's via the private LAN - low latency and potentially no bandwidth costs.
If you go with an Amazon based solution then you don't have this benefit due to the NAT-like way Amazon works and the fact they either own their own datacenters or at least don't allow any private routes between other servers in the same DC.
(I don't know whether every Amazon availability zone is in a wholly operated Amazon datacenter)
Re: Reality of budget VPS services
#48Can anyone else comment on experiences with Linode (and equivalent alternatives)? I'm considering moving a group of servers off expensive dedicated hosting ($400/server) to a VPS service. I've looked at Amazon EC2 but they don't seem to have a sweet spot for my needs.
I've run all my personal services (email, web sites, screen sessions etc.) off two Bytemark[1] virtual machines with 500MB of RAM each and the only problems I've experienced have been one or two 'high up' problems such as two core routers going down at the same time - i.e. nothing to do with contention. If you need more RAM, you just pay the extra monthly/annual fee for the next plan up and reboot the machine. I pay…
> I've run all my personal services (email
Re: Reality of budget VPS services
#49I've been at Servint for years and can recommend them enough. They are -not- budget (I pay $129/m for an Ultimate VPS http://www.servint.net/vps.php).
I can only assume they have a terrible marketing department because they almost never rate a mention in articles like this one, despite being the pioneer in the VPS space.
Re: Reality of budget VPS services
#50Does anyone have a good recommendation for a host with a nicely spread out global presence? I am aware of the big players (AWS, Linode, Softlayer, RimuHosting) but they all seem to have shortcomings that don't make anyone particularly ideal and I'd love to avoid a combination of all if I could. I am looking to minimize network latency and maximize disk space with memory and CPU being secondary concerns. More or less…
Depending on access pattern you could use linodes to serve most active content and dump the rest to s3.