Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 188.8.131.52
Forum Moderators: phranque
I'm running my own server, but I don't need much bandwidth. Where I'm starting to run into trouble is offering visitors rather resource-hungry PHP scripts; they tie up my P4 3.4gHz pretty good. I have a business cable connection with 640k up.
A virtual server isn't "yours" - you're sharing resources on the machine with 10-20 other users, each of who might have a dozen websites.
You'll need to consider performance benefits/loss.
I take it you have ruled out a dedicated server, perhaps on cost?
But first of all you should think about distributing your risk, even the best host can fall sometimes.
I assume you are generating revenue from these sites. So why cut all the revenue sources at once? Why not distribute the risk to 3 different hosting companies, even different Data Center.
If you still think you need VPS (or dedicated) I would recommend <snip>. These guys have been in business for more then 10 years. And I have never ever possibly seen such a great support service. Almost all of my support demands and queries are replied in less then a minute, and I am on the other side of the planet. And it's not just that they are not that loaded because it's night in US, other US customers have the same experience.
[edited by: Woz at 5:41 am (utc) on May 20, 2005]
[edit reason] No specific hosts please, see TOS & Charter [/edit]
I would rather put the 3 sites in 3 different Data Centers, not only on different machines. If a server is down, then just one of the sites will be down.
Anyway, it depends on the revenue the sites make. If the sites are generating just a few bucks and you afford to have all 3 sites down at once for 24 hours, you'll be ok on VPS.
Hosting risk should be distributed as well, besides the different niches that your sites should be in and various source of traffic (these are mentioned in other threads).