Every time a link is tracked through your server it would cause one http request to your server, plus (probably) 2 to the database. (one to lookup the link, and one to save the stats)

That's not a heavy burden, but it could potentially add up. Shared hosting definitely has it's limits, but I can't imagine this causing too much noticable trouble unless you're getting pretty huge clickthrough. (at which point, in theory, it would be self-sustaining enough to warrant it's own server or VPS)

-Ryan

No such thing as unlimited. Strictly marketing ploy.

Unlimited = overselling servers = big no no.

This technique has been out for a long time now and everyone seems to be a victim of it. The reason I say victim is because of what is offered. On a server you get x space and x ram followed by x processors. For a decent server you are looking at about 300 per month to lease. If you are paying that price per box the configuration is decent enough to be called a web server. Here comes the catches:

1) You need a backup strategy for this server. Evey GB in storage = another GB in backup
2) Support. Unfortunately there is alot of outsourced support and slow support if you are lucky
3) Ratio of sites to box is usually high. One provider I know stores 2000 sites per box that they pay only 200 for each month. The offer unlimited hosting but the biggest account only uses 3gb.
4) What are you responsible for when you are playing this market? Usually the all care no responsibility philosophy is adopted.
5) Quality of customer is also another issue as usually punters of first generation sites are put on these boxes.
6) What is the offer for the price. Well "Unlimited". If you have a cheeky bugger sign up they will attempt to backup servers and god knows what else and unfortunately you have to wear it as you offer "Unlimited".

In conclusion you have got a great recipe for disaster. While I dont like to wish this on anyone it is a matter of time before larger more popular hosting providers start going ass up because of this methology and practice. I honestly think that the ones that do go under deserve it and they will... it is just a matter of when.

If you are selling to clients and you are responsible for the hosting you can't be frugal (and you should have some padding to get quality).

Get a VPS from a higher end company like liquidweb. Going to cost you about 40 to 60 per month and you have a lot more control.

Down the road you will find that you have plenty of memory, etc... but you are making to many requests. Change a setting on the server and gives you more padding.... find you need a dedicated, easy transfer to a new box, etc....

Never host client sites on shared hosting - to much crap can go wrong.

I agree stma..The problem with alot of these hosting companies is they dont care and offer poor service and not good quality hosting.VPS as a service is a good option as long as you go with a reputable service.