Agreed.
Well said. I would even start with something smaller, monitor it, and move up as you NEED to. So make sure you get BURSTABLE BW. No need to over pay.
Summed up nicely. Bravo. :rasta:
Need the Best Damn Dedicated Server Company
- Thread starter moratraffic
- Start date
Thanks Bratefootsies. BTW another thing sprung into my mind for the OP: Is a dedicated server really necessary? You see failsafe/load balancing can be set up using VPS containers (on separate machines) too. Basically there are only two things you can't alter in a VPS container: the kernel (including modules) and the swap. Everything else's basically the same. Now if you want to run a VPN service off your server (and the kernel lacks the TUN/TAP module) then yes, you might need a dedi (I've seen VPS providers who specifically forbid VPNs). But I can hardly see a reason (or a justification) for it (except if you want that killer hardware, which I've discussed above).
Hell cloud hosting with a trusted provider (softlayer, rackspace, etc) would be a very good option for scalability. Though if you actually do put thru 15TB of bandwidth thats gona get expensive, but if you don't then least you only have to pay for what you did use. But if you're not making enough to cover least 300$ a month, AND still pulling 15TB something is wrong with you.
For what he is looking to run, honestly, he needs dedicated. No one should be trying to use cloud, or shared environment on a project of that size. I understand about controlling costs, but it really is a very bad idea IMHO on a project of this scale. Virtual/Cloud/VPS are wonderful for some types of sites on a smaller scale. But with the amount of users, bandwidth, and scale O.P. is looking to do... I would not trust my business to anything other than dedicated.
If it should scale the way he wants it to, that is going to be a resource monster. So you do not want it effecting others on the same box. Cloud? I would not trust my money makers to a cloud environment, but again, I suppose it comes down to your own trust level. Many around WF rave about their cloud hosting. I have not seen one pushing anything on this scale, but for what they were doing. Sounded lovely.
If I went dedicated, I would make sure I had RAID as well for redundancy on a 2nd drive, daily back ups, and I would not start out with huge BW myself. I would start out with 25/100/250 to start... monitor it during growth... and adjust accordingly as I grew. Something like this, which could be a lot of traffic but text based, will be a lot different compared to many of today's content and video heavy sites. I would make sure I had some decent RAM as well.
... you do realize that when bandwidth and reach is the main factor , cloud would be better than a dedi right? Where as a dedi is going to be better for more power hungry tasks as well as customizing it to specific purposes. I'm not talking bout those really cheap shared services some host call a cloud, I'm talking bout an actual cloud like you would get from rackspace, multiple scalable machines spread across a network. If bandwidth were not the main factor, then sure it might make sense to lease a dedi from you (btw it'd help if you made the url in your signature clickable)
Kbizzle, you're a funny guy.
I am giving the O.P. my recommendation based on what he is looking to do. He is looking at hardware, memory, and BW recommendations based on his project. I would never trust one of my main bread and butter sites, especially one on this scale, to shared/virtual/VPS/cloud. No matter the host.
/2cts
Well, even a VPS can scale up well. All you have to do is to load-balance the most essential services as the traffic rises (e.g. Apache, MySQL, maybe DNS etc.), and you can do this with any machine that runs Linux (it's also quite good at clustering too
). Metering and monitoring works on a VPS too. And who said your next node in a cluster has to be a VPS? Of course not! If you need failsafe/redundancy you can do that with VPSes on separate machines too (at least in the beginning). Who says that you can't create a "hybrid" once you realize that your traffic is too big for any VPS plan? But until that happens you don't have to spend a fortune on dedis for "future profits" (which don't have to be as big as expected, remember, the world economy's still unstable). Besides creating backups "snapshots" of VPS containers is usually much easier. All you have to do is copy a .tar.bz2/gz file to a "safe" place and that's it. And if bad things happen, you just take the file, load it back to the hypervisor and voila! Everything's back and working.
Well, even a VPS can scale up well. All you have to do is to load-balance the most essential services as the traffic rises (e.g. Apache, MySQL, maybe DNS etc.), and you can do this with any machine that runs Linux (it's also quite good at clustering too
Oh I agree. You 'could' go that route. There is typically, in most solutions, multiple ways to 'skin the cat'. It simply is not a way I recommend for users on this type of project. If they have something smaller, or are a part timers, virtual/VPS is a solid cost effective solution.
I do not feel it is good for something of scale like this. But, as you probably well know from any hosting discussions.... there is rarely a SINGLE recommendation or consensus in the end on the 'best' way.
Well, I don't know the exact nor the expected numbers the OP wants to fulfill. So I say MAYBE.
On the other hand you're right. I recommend something, you recommend something else, someone third can recommend an entirely different thing. Yet it's still up on the OP to choose the solution that fits him the most.
On the other hand you're right. I recommend something, you recommend something else, someone third can recommend an entirely different thing. Yet it's still up on the OP to choose the solution that fits him the most.
Thanks again guys. We are probably going with softlayer, we just have to figure out which options we want to go with in there. I personally like all the features on there and will allow me to upgrade as needed, which saves on cost obviously.
Aside from my questions being answered, there is a hell of a lot of good info in this thread to anyone looking for something similar.
Aside from my questions being answered, there is a hell of a lot of good info in this thread to anyone looking for something similar.
Wat? Scaling is what cloud computing does best!
I know people who run their custom PPC/PPV tracking system off cloud computing because it provides the fastest response time.
I know another guy who ran a site doing a million uniques a day off $99/mo cloud computing hosting from SoftLayer.