Dedicated Server alternatives to HG

Chownc

9 years ago

I have used the guys at Server101 successfully in the past for stuff like this...

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9740562].message }}

nicoli 9 years ago

Originally Posted by Chownc

I have used the guys at Server101 successfully in the past for stuff like this...

Thanks, but one look at their website was enough to discount that recommendation!
- [ 1 ] Thanks
- 1 reply
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9740565].message }}
- Chownc 9 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by nicoli
  
  Thanks, but one look at their website was enough to discount that recommendation!
  
  Yes...cheap and cheerful but they get the job done...
  
  Thanks
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9740835].message }}

Mike Thomson

9 years ago

I think beyond hosting is the best I tried them 2 years ago and the were excellent.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9740745].message }}

Kingfish85

9 years ago

Originally Posted by nicoli

Hey all,

I have 13 Dedicated Boxes with HG (linux) and I am looking for a more stable/reliable provider.

Do any of you have more than one dedicated box with another company that you can recommend? I need nginx/whm/cpanel combo

p.s. Not your own company! And please, nothing associated with EIG!

Thx,

Nic

What are you doing with these servers & what are the specs on the current ones you have?

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

|~| VeeroTech Hosting - sales @ veerotech.net
|~| High Performance CloudLinux & LiteSpeed Powered Web Hosting
|~| cPanel & WHM - Softaculous - Website Builder - R1Soft - SpamExperts
|~| Visit us @veerotech Facebook - Twitter - LinkedIn

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9741355].message }}

nicoli 9 years ago

Originally Posted by Kingfish85

What are you doing with these servers & what are the specs on the current ones you have?

Business. And all are HG's "Pro Dedicated" packages.
- Thanks
- 1 reply
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9741364].message }}
- Kingfish85 9 years ago
  
  Originally Posted by nicoli
  
  Business. And all are HG's "Pro Dedicated" packages.
  
  "Business" doesn't help. What type of sites/services are running on them? Of the people we've migrated away from HostGator dedicated servers, they didn't even need them. To top it off, they were also running on virtual servers being sold as "dedicated servers".
  
  What's your storage usage like? How much are you using?
  
  What's the memory utilization like?
  
  Thanks
  
  Signature
  
  |~| VeeroTech Hosting - sales @ veerotech.net
  |~| High Performance CloudLinux & LiteSpeed Powered Web Hosting
  |~| cPanel & WHM - Softaculous - Website Builder - R1Soft - SpamExperts
  |~| Visit us @veerotech Facebook - Twitter - LinkedIn
  
  {{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9741374].message }}

kilgore

9 years ago

I don't recommend it to people without technical knowledge, but if you're running 13 dedicated boxes, you should at least look into AWS. If you buy reserved instances, the pricing is reasonable, but even if it costs a little more, the feature set can't be beat.

For instance, we usually run 5 EC2 instances, plus an RDS (MySQL server) and ElastiCache (for Redis), but since it's the holidays, I wanted a little extra capacity. In just a few clicks, I added a couple more servers that because of scripts I had written (using AWS's APIs) automatically fell in behind my load balancer. When we have a post or message that's going out that'll drive extra traffic, I'll do the same -- I've scaled to up to 20 instances for short bursts, then take them down again as I don't need them. Moreover, I have rules set up so that as my server load increases or decreases, instances scale up/down automatically. My customers are happy and my costs are contained.

I should note that all that took a bit of custom programming to get all that to work -- and especially to optimize -- for my architecture, but the point is that all the tools are there to do it. Try doing that with a dedicated server.

I also like that they're constantly adding new features, increasing hardware specs and lowering prices. Speaking of which, if you do decide to go with AWS, you might wait until early 2015 as the new C4 servers are coming out -- they have processors that Intel custom built for Amazon so their performance should be fantastic. And if past experience is anything to judge by, they'll probably be even cheaper than the C3s are today.

Best of luck!

[ 1 ] Thanks
1 reply

Signature

<< This is not a sales pitch >>

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9741396].message }}

nicoli

9 years ago

Interesting, I'll look into it thanks!

Originally Posted by kilgore

I don't recommend it to people without technical knowledge, but if you're running 13 dedicated boxes, you should at least look into AWS. If you buy reserved instances, the pricing is reasonable, but even if it costs a little more, the feature set can't be beat.

For instance, we usually run 5 EC2 instances, plus an RDS (MySQL server) and ElastiCache (for Redis), but since it's the holidays, I wanted a little extra capacity. In just a few clicks, I added a couple more servers that because of scripts I had written (using AWS's APIs) automatically fell in behind my load balancer. When we have a post or message that's going out that'll drive extra traffic, I'll do the same -- I've scaled to up to 20 instances for short bursts, then take them down again as I don't need them. Moreover, I have rules set up so that as my server load increases or decreases, instances scale up/down automatically. My customers are happy and my costs are contained.

I should note that all that took a bit of custom programming to get all that to work -- and especially to optimize -- for my architecture, but the point is that all the tools are there to do it. Try doing that with a dedicated server.

I also like that they're constantly adding new features, increasing hardware specs and lowering prices. Speaking of which, if you do decide to go with AWS, you might wait until early 2015 as the new C4 servers are coming out -- they have processors that Intel custom built for Amazon so their performance should be fantastic. And if past experience is anything to judge by, they'll probably be even cheaper than the C3s are today.

Best of luck!

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9741438].message }}

nicoli

9 years ago

That's all private info that I'm happy to discuss off thread. how long have you been in business, where are your DCs and do you also offer colo?

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9741383].message }}

nicoli

9 years ago

Oh ok thanks. I need dedicated though.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9741416].message }}

Kingfish85

9 years ago

Originally Posted by nicoli

Oh ok thanks. I need dedicated though.

Why do you need "dedicated" - for the most part, the only difference is that it's physical hardware. A physical server doesn't function any differently than a virtual server. If anything, the "dedicated" physical server on a single-server level is a single point of failure.

Thanks
1 reply

Signature

|~| VeeroTech Hosting - sales @ veerotech.net
|~| High Performance CloudLinux & LiteSpeed Powered Web Hosting
|~| cPanel & WHM - Softaculous - Website Builder - R1Soft - SpamExperts
|~| Visit us @veerotech Facebook - Twitter - LinkedIn

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9741433].message }}

nicoli

9 years ago

I've worked with virtualistation since esxi back in the day and would never host on virtual machines. Redundancy on a box with two psus and raid is good enough for me when switching/load balancers are behind them anyway. I've just seen far too many problems with vm's that I'm too jaded to even bother anymore. Personally the cost savings are the only attractiveness in the dedi vs vm debate

Originally Posted by Kingfish85

Why do you need "dedicated" - for the most part, the only difference is that it's physical hardware. A physical server doesn't function any differently than a virtual server. If anything, the "dedicated" physical server on a single-server level is a single point of failure.

Thanks
1 reply

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9741451].message }}

Kingfish85

9 years ago

Originally Posted by nicoli

I've worked with virtualistation since esxi back in the day and would never host on virtual machines. Redundancy on a box with two psus and raid is good enough for me when switching/load balancers are behind them anyway. I've just seen far too many problems with vm's that I'm too jaded to even bother anymore. Personally the cost savings are the only attractiveness in the dedi vs vm debate

Well, OK. Still multiple SPOF's - disk backplane, power backplane, raid card etc. Are you sure your "dedicated" servers with HostGator aren't virtual servers? Many of them are in fact, even though they're labeled as "dedicated".

It sounds like you already know what you're looking for...Amazon & Linode as mentioned above are all virtual as well...

As far as the reliability of virtualization goes, our entire shared & reseller infrastructure is virtualized, close to 20K websites without issue. RTO is much quicker as well. When you remove the hardware dependence layer, you remove many of the issues associated with using the hardware directly. With clustered storage, a VM images is available on 2-3 storage hosts at any given time. Our clusters are treated as a "shared-nothing" approach, should a storage or hypervisor fail, it doesn't matter, it gets pulled from the rack and replaced with another server, then synced with the cluster & back into production ready for workloads.

That said, take a look at LimeStone Networks. They have decent pricing for physical servers & good support options.

Thanks
2 replies

Signature

|~| VeeroTech Hosting - sales @ veerotech.net
|~| High Performance CloudLinux & LiteSpeed Powered Web Hosting
|~| cPanel & WHM - Softaculous - Website Builder - R1Soft - SpamExperts
|~| Visit us @veerotech Facebook - Twitter - LinkedIn

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9741565].message }}

swpower 9 years ago

Server4You.com - right now you get a 8 core, 32 GB RAM, 2 TB disk RAID1 and unlimited bandwidth for $67/month for a LAMP server, a bit higher if you want Windows Server. Then you need to add space for several generations of backups. I believe it costs $15/month. Each additional IP costs $1/month.

Then install ISPconfig3 on it and you don't have to worry about CPanel or Plesk fees.
- [ 1 ] Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9741733].message }}
nicoli 9 years ago

Originally Posted by Kingfish85

Are you sure your "dedicated" servers with HostGator aren't virtual servers? Many of them are in fact, even though they're labeled as "dedicated".

That's a pretty bold statement mate. Are you able to prove that? I would love to know because if that's the case I would bring it up with them.
- Thanks
{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9742794].message }}

BrianJM85

9 years ago

If you're going to look into AWS, add Linode to the list.

Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9741418].message }}

yakim1

9 years ago

I've been with GVO hosting at...

GVO WebHosting - Professional Web Hosting Services

My servers are dedicated cloud servers. I've been with GVO since 2006 and I have been very happy.

Best regards,
Steve Yakim

[ 1 ] Thanks

{{ DiscussionBoard.errors[9742631].message }}

Dedicated Server alternatives to HG

Trending Topics

Some interesting stats about brand comms

Fixing a massive traffic drop after rebranding

Meta AI now has Google Search results

Looking at the average screen time and socmed usage

What's the Best IM-Related Skill to Learn Today That Can Help in the Future?