virtual private server
- Thread starter the_box
- Start date
The one advantage is cost, you're looking at say, £29.99/month instead of at least twice that for a cheap dedicated server.
Something you may want to look at is simply a reseller package with a host - this absolves you from admin of the server.
Something you may want to look at is simply a reseller package with a host - this absolves you from admin of the server.
A VPS is generally a full root environment, along the same lines as a dedicated server but with shared hardware.
The main benefit is that you have more flexibility with regard to configuration - you can create your own httpd.conf, php.ini, my.cnf, etc and have guaranteed resources however, unless you're paying for a managed package, you will require some experience in looking after a Linux server.
HTH
.
The main benefit is that you have more flexibility with regard to configuration - you can create your own httpd.conf, php.ini, my.cnf, etc and have guaranteed resources however, unless you're paying for a managed package, you will require some experience in looking after a Linux server.
HTH
.
SherberT* said:
thanks
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 31 Jan 2004
- Posts
- 16,338
- Location
- Plymouth
Another vote for 2host
VDS/VPS (whatever you'd prefer to call them) are a great idea if you need stability (ie, don't want other shared sites affecting yours) or flexibility (try out your own compilations, etc), and/or don't need the full power of a dedi
It's always easy to upgrade, too...however one downside is that when things go titty-up you don't have a remote reboot whereas on a full dedi (with a decent company
) you should have access to one for instant reboots.
VDS/VPS (whatever you'd prefer to call them) are a great idea if you need stability (ie, don't want other shared sites affecting yours) or flexibility (try out your own compilations, etc), and/or don't need the full power of a dedi
It's always easy to upgrade, too...however one downside is that when things go titty-up you don't have a remote reboot whereas on a full dedi (with a decent company
) you should have access to one for instant reboots.
Isn't there a major downside of a VPS compared to a dedicated server in the throttling action of the virtual server software e.g. limited to x amount of CPU time/max CPU usage, and only a certain allocation of the shared memory? In that VPS are great for basic server usage, but as soon as you want to do anything fairly heavy-duty you run into big performance issues? I can see the benefit of VPS over shared as those minimum allocated resources will be guaranteed, but I'm unsure how that affects performance.
Augmented said:
You certainly wouldn't want to do anything too CPU/IO/Memory intensive or performance critical on a small VDS. 256MB RAM and 'fair usage' of a high end CPU is generally sufficient in my experience for cPanel/WHM, all associated services and 80-100 low usage sites without degrading performance too much.
The real benefit of a VDS over shared hosting, as I said above, is flexibility and configurability. If you're considering it solely for performance reasons, it's a bad move, you might as well stay with shared hosting or go for a full dedi IMO.
Beansprout said:
Certain companies are currently working on a reboot panel for VDSs
.