Dedicate Host Question!

Mia · 02-25-2003, 08:36 PM

Help. I am at the stage where my site needs a dedicated server. What I am looking at is 1GB RAM, 2GHz Intel processor, 3 x 36 GB SCSI harddrives Raid 5 SCSI. I'll be running linux, possibly Redhat 8.0. Looks as if I'll get 1Mbps bandwidth on 95th percentil basis or 320 Gig included with the package deal. But my concern is that I am seemingly getting an amazing deal and am stuck in a bidding war for my business...with two different companies. I would like to know your opinions, if any of you work with or heard through the coconut wireless about Unified Hosting and Candid Hosting. And what you think of the package that I am trying to create for my dedicated host.

wsjb78 · 02-25-2003, 08:41 PM

Are those managed or unmanaged servers? And do you have experience with either one?

Mia · 02-25-2003, 08:45 PM

not sure what you mean exactly by managed vs. unmanaged...and no, I have not worked with either. I am on a virtual host now and need for functionality to run on my own server.

-=HUNGRYMAN=- · 02-26-2003, 04:52 AM

Of the 2 you list, I can say that before owning my own hosting company, I did do some business with Candid, and they treated me good. I have never dealt with Unified, nor heard of them to be totally honest, but that does not mean they are not a good company either.

I am just Curious ... what kind of price are they offering you for that package with 1 Mbit of transfer included ??

To answer the question about managed vs. non-managed hosting ...

We offer MANAGED, which basically means that we do everything for you, as opposed to DEDICATED, where you are responsible for providing your own server administration.

wsjb78 · 02-26-2003, 06:48 AM

Well, managed vs. unmanaged:

If you're good at *nix or are willing to learn then I'd go with unmanaged servers. Meaning you get root access and you are responsible for the system to run. If the machine will be fucked up all the host normally does is put it back to state when you started renting it. So all your modifications are gone.
This is preferable beacause it's cheaper and you can customize the server to your own needs.

However if you don't have time nor knowledge to do that, then you better go with managed servers. So if there's a problem arising you have support to handle it.

From what I've got with your messages I rather recommend right now having managed servers.

AcidMaX · 02-26-2003, 10:23 AM

yeah what price are they offering you? 1mbps will go awfully fast if you have even the slightest amt of traffic.

Andy

Vid Vicious · 02-26-2003, 01:35 PM

Like hungryman said .. Check out the sig

Visualad · 02-26-2003, 02:49 PM

I can only recommend Dynamic Hosting.. Theyve been great with all our sites.. all the time.

and look.. I dont work for them, nor have any referral code...

check them out at www.dynamichosting.com

great service. excellent performerance.

LostMind · 02-26-2003, 10:09 PM

Hmmm, stay away from 95th percentile billing. That is a blatant ripoff and not a good choice for any webmaster in todays hosting market.

As for your needs... sounds like you are possibly going for overkill with that server setup.

While I am a big fan of a proper raid setup, you most likely only want security and so, all you need is a backup system. Mirroring would prolly be best - and you only need two drives, so you save some bling

Mister X · 02-26-2003, 10:57 PM

I have to agree with LostMind on this one. 3x36GB drives is wayyyyyyy overkill for almost anuy site. 2 drives should be lots and 20gb should be plenty big enough for even the most extravagant site. Drop it down and save some green. And if you don't know Linux well then go with managed. You can screw yourself up totally if you try learning as you go. If you start learning Linux and get comfortable with it you can always switch a couple months down the road.

StuartD · 02-26-2003, 11:58 PM

Not only do I agree with Lostmind, I just wanted to have it noted that while he only has 7 posts here, he is by no means someone to be taken lightly.

He really knows his stuff, and has been owning his own hosting company for a while. www.ezprovider.net is a top notch company that just keeps growing exponentially all the time.

There aren't a lot of people that I go around "praising" but he and his company are one... whether you ever use his services or not, at least take his advice.

Just thought I'd throw that in.

keyDet79 · 02-27-2003, 12:28 PM

I must tell you, 320gb over a 1mbit line will gonna be hard, theoretically you can squeeze 324gb over this 125KB/s connection (8 kilobit = 1 kilobyte), but considering packet loss because of a lot of different factors you will probably get 200gb max, or have an unacceptably slow server (for an adult site).

If you want a decent server (for a very reasonable price) on a 100mbit burstable port, I recommend my VibeHosting. Our dedicated servers are unmanaged but we do try to give our customers the best support we can, 24/7.

Brad Mitchell · 02-27-2003, 12:39 PM

My 2 Cents,

You're TOTALLY overbuying on hardware. Using that little bandwidth you need nothing like those server specs. Additionally, 95th percentile is a screw - find someone that bills based on average billing. Having an adult website, you will peak easily at 2-3 times your average usage... 95th percentile punishes you for spiking.

Just to give you an example.. I just quoted for someone that was 95th percentile with another large host. On his last bill he paid for 35 megabit at $69 per megabit... so over $2400. His average utilization? Only like 13 megabit. So, with me or any number of other hosts, his bill would have been $500-$800 less.

I've never heard of Unified Hosting so I can't advise you there. I'm sure Candid would do an OK job. I don't know what they're quoting you but it's probably worth researching all of your options before making a final decision.

Best of Luck!

Sincerely,

Brad
Toll Free 866-SINEMPIRE
ICQ 56950199

Mia · 02-27-2003, 02:39 PM

Thank you all for your posts. I will take all of this into consideration but need to make a decision on a host soon, my virtual host is too slow. I'll let you know what I've decided and when my site is up and running properly I hope all of you will take a look and give your honest opinion.