co-location/dedicated servers

H

Harry

New member
I'm just wondering where many of you have your web hosting server located? I've usually had servers in Canada or the USA and "once", had a server in the UK.

How about the rest of you? Any major preferences? :mic:
 
Cal813 said:
I'm just wondering where many of you have your web hosting server located? I've usually had servers in Canada or the USA and "once", had a server in the UK.

How about the rest of you? Any major preferences? :mic:
Click to expand...
hi,
INDIA is also consider for that
 
With our recent move, our new server is located in the States ... Texas actually.
Since we have about 80% clientel in Canada, we wanted a server located here or the States. It just made geographical (is that a word :)) sense. ;)
 
A good rule of thumb is to put your server where your visitors are. The closer the server, the lower the latency, the better the performance.
 
WiredTree Zac said:
A good rule of thumb is to put your server where your visitors are. The closer the server, the lower the latency, the better the performance.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I agree with you there :)

The last company I worked with had a server in Canada, 2 in the States and another in UK. We had customers basically from each of those 3 countries and found it easier for the customers. It also keeps things more organized, because we can assign all people from that region, to that certain server.
 
a few pointers:

1. look at your geographical needs
2. look at your host's network
3. look at your host's support and expertise
4. look at the prices
 
I have always located our servers in the US. I currently have servers in Vegas, and I am working on getting a rack in rlando or Atlanta as well.
 
WiredTree Zac said:
A good rule of thumb is to put your server where your visitors are. The closer the server, the lower the latency, the better the performance.
Click to expand...

You are exactly correct but just to add to this, Google rankings can also be affected by the location of your servers which is something a lot of people now consider when purchasing.
 
I started out with a VPS. VPSes are great! Much more economical and great for starting out hosting. But for biger resources dedicated servers seem to be the way to go. REliable and feature rich providers like SoftLayer bring you all the benefits of colo to a dedicated environment. I'm coloing now since we want to own my hardware and have full control but dedicated is most popular and most of our colo'ed customers are moving to dedicated solutions.

It's just cheaper and easier, especially on the books, to have a dedicated server lease. It's also easier to upgrade, cancel, or move servers around when you have a monthly dedicated server lease. Plus, the more dedi boxes you have with a provider, the cheaper they get. This is generally not true with owned servers as companies like Dell only discount for mass purchases.
 
USA, and I think I'll keep to it, cheapest pricing, best connectivity. At the moment in Orlando, FL with ************.
 
Harry said:
Yeah, I agree with you there :)

The last company I worked with had a server in Canada, 2 in the States and another in UK. We had customers basically from each of those 3 countries and found it easier for the customers. It also keeps things more organized, because we can assign all people from that region, to that certain server.
Click to expand...

that is not always the case. network routes are at times more complex than most people think. We are partnered with Peer1 because of network traffic and peering they are what I believe to be the best routes for North America Traffic.

We also have hundreds of customers in Europe and hundreds in Australia and since Peer1 has routes to Europe most of our customers have short hoops to the servers. Our Australia customers also don't complain.

however, we do have servers in 5 different data Centers around North America and now looking to add data centers in Europe and Australia through acquisitions so maybe I read routes a little different.

The big advantage for customers to have sites local to their market is for local search results!
 
1maverick said:
that is not always the case. network routes are at times more complex than most people think. We are partnered with Peer1 because of network traffic and peering they are what I believe to be the best routes for North America Traffic.

We also have hundreds of customers in Europe and hundreds in Australia and since Peer1 has routes to Europe most of our customers have short hoops to the servers. Our Australia customers also don't complain.

however, we do have servers in 5 different data Centers around North America and now looking to add data centers in Europe and Australia through acquisitions so maybe I read routes a little different.

The big advantage for customers to have sites local to their market is for local search results!
Click to expand...

Most of the web traffic goes through LA so having servers here is often optimal. Also, datacenters with direct "speedways" to the east coast who are on the west coast such as some in SF are also ideal. But of course, if you can have servers in all major areas making your servers close and fast for any customer, regardless of location, and are able to mirror your data using services such as ServerPOP then go for it. It is sure to be the best setup for speed.

Best place to look for speeds around the word to a particular datacenter is the TOS or SLA. They usually cover latency and speeds to each major area of the world there and generally meet these speeds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Supporters

Back
Top