All virtual

shockym

shockym

New member
Has anyone here played around with this? Right now we are testing this out with personal sites (mind you, like my own personal site and so on), but how many out there are using physical servers compared to virtual ones? I guess a random Friday poll type question really. I am super impressed with the speed of things too. :)
 
Sorry for asking, but what is a virtual server? And how is it different from a physical server?
 
Probably referring to virtual private servers / VPS hosting. Basically what VMware does.

I've never hosted live websites on a VPS system, but I do use a VPS on my computer for development purposes. It works great, exactly the same as if I was running a separate physical machine as a dev server (I used to do that, but going the VPS route is a lot more convenient).
 
VPS is limited however expandable beyond dedicated, so based on your needs as they grow you can upgrade and stay on same VPS compare to moving site on dedicated, while VPS tend to cost more as you expand unlike dedicated, with VPS you can increase one thing you can't on dedicated while still limited, this would be CPU.
 
eMediaSalesAbe said:
VPS is limited however expandable beyond dedicated, so based on your needs as they grow you can upgrade and stay on same VPS compare to moving site on dedicated, while VPS tend to cost more as you expand unlike dedicated, with VPS you can increase one thing you can't on dedicated while still limited, this would be CPU.
Click to expand...
Maybe I need another cup of coffee to wake up, but I'm not following your train of thought, eMediaSalesAbe. :confused:
 
We decided to do this with a few of our own sites to start out with just so we can avoid having to depend solely on a person in the DC, or elsewhere to access what we need. And not have to deal with a ton of the garage that comes into play for it, like net issues for one thing.
 
Many people forget that a VPS requires the same amount of work in security, updates and monitoring as a dedicated machine. There are advantages to the VPS in that you only have the one kernel to update etc, and you can increase VPS packages on the fly, but just like if you expanded through the VPS packages, you're in the same boat as a dedicated server. Eventually the server CAN NOT handle the load or traffic you're pointing to it and you'll need to upgrade.

We run VPS for some of our smaller sites. One of the nice things is that you can get a totally separate block of IPs which is ideal for SEO rankings.

VPS is definitely cheaper than dedicated servers, but for me I'd much rather be on a Celeron paying $60/month than being on a VPS paying $60/month for less allocation. Being on your own machine has advantages and disadvantages.

We run multiple DNS's on VPS platforms and on Celerons - in that regards there's no difference for us other than the cost.
 
We run all production sites and services on a virtual environment on our own collocated hardware.

Offers so much more control, monitoring, better uptime and a lot easier backups.
 
handsonhosting said:
Many people forget that a VPS requires the same amount of work in security, updates and monitoring as a dedicated machine. There are advantages to the VPS in that you only have the one kernel to update etc, and you can increase VPS packages on the fly, but just like if you expanded through the VPS packages, you're in the same boat as a dedicated server. Eventually the server CAN NOT handle the load or traffic you're pointing to it and you'll need to upgrade.
Click to expand...

Well said Handsonhosting:agree:. Many people are ignorant about this:sad:. Considering the above quoted matter, one can make the choice between virtual and dedicated.:thumbup: And also don't forget about other factors that also should be considered while selecting a plan.
 
Artashes said:
Sorry for asking, but what is a virtual server? And how is it different from a physical server?
Click to expand...

A virtual private server (VPS, also referred to as Virtual Dedicated Server or VDS) is a method of partitioning a physical server computer into multiple servers such that each has the appearance and capabilities of running on its own dedicated machine. Each virtual server can run its own full-fledged operating system, and each server can be independently rebooted.

The practice of partitioning a single server so that it appears as multiple servers has long been common practice in mainframe computers, but has seen a resurgence lately with the development of virtualization software and technologies for other architectures.
 
I've looked at VPS servers from time to time but ultimately decided that shared currently serves my needs perfectly well. I don't see any reason with my current usage to make the swap, knowing that it may involve more work. If it ain't broke, don't fix it ;)
 
Good point AbbieRose. But sometimes you need to look ahead - like upgrading from XP to Windows 7. XP has been around for seven years and will eventually go away like Windows 95 and 98. If shared fits your needs perfectly right now, then I'd agree - stick with shared. Who knows? Maybe your business will quadruple this year and VPS will look more attractive. The best to your success.
 
There are some other advantages to VPS as well, outside of the relatively low cost for an enterprise class VPS, they are also much easier to maintain and better for the environment than a traditional dedicated server.

From the perspective of a provider, our energy costs per server went down exponentially.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Supporters

Back
Top