VPS vs. Shared Hosting - Do You Need a VPS?

VPS6.NET

New member
We often hear the question, "do I need a VPS?" Whether you are looking to upgrade from Shared hosting, or find a cost-effective alternative to dedicated server hosting, a VPS will most likely be the perfect fit for your budget and needs.


Shared hosting, virtual private servers, and dedicated servers are often compared as three of the main web hosting solutions, occupying "tiers" one above the other. Shared hosting is the cheapest option, but also the least secure and lowest in quality. Conversely, dedicated servers are very secure and completely customizable, but often very expensive and difficult to maintain.*VPS hosting is a solution that hybridizes the two: host servers are populated with multiple users, like Shared hosting, yet every VPS environment is completely private and customizable, like dedicated server hosting.*Below is an in-depth look at the key differences between Shared and VPS hosting.

Platform Capabilities*- VPS vs. Shared Hosting:
Shared hosting accounts are typically setup with a panel like cPanel or Plesk, where users have access only to the "user level." Aside from FTP, the control panel will be the user's only method of server administration, and server functions will be limited, in large extent, by those available in the control panel.
A virtual private server, by contrast, has essentially the same capabilities as a dedicated server. Though cPanel or another control panel can be installed on a VPS (this is how many Shared resellers setup their hosts),*a VPS user will have*complete*control over the system via the "secure shell," or SSH.*There are absolutely no limits imposed on a VPS beyond the limits of hardware; any VPS will allow you the ability to create "unlimited domains," "unlimited users," etc, up to the capacity of the CPU, RAM, and disk space allocated to your VPS.

Security*- VPS vs. Shared Hosting:
Insecurity is a basic and innate flaw of Shared hosting environments. Since every user on a Shared hosting server will be running applications within the same filesystem and same operating system, there is relatively great opportunity for a single user to exploit the system and negatively affect all other users hosted on the same server.
A VPS, like a dedicated server, will remain almost completely isolated from other virtual servers.*Every VPS runs its own independent operating system, and in some virtual servers, even its own kernel (see OpenVZ vs. Xen: What's the difference, and which is better?). This allows VPS users to customize their own firewalls and security settings, totally independently of other virtual servers running on the same host.

Options and Extensibility*- VPS vs. Shared Hosting:
Shared hosting providers have complete control over what will be available to you in your Shared hosting environment, and the options are usually very limited. A setup that is compatible with one host may be completely unusable with another host, because of limits on the ability of users to customize software like mailservers, webservers, and MySQL. You will also be out of luck if you require an operating system (OS) or software that your Shared host does not support.
However, since a VPS is just a server inside another server, or "virtual server," you will have*complete control over your individual server's environment. With most VPS providers, you can choose from many different operating systems; with any VPS host, you will have the ability to*install any software you need. VPS hosts will set absolutely no restrictions on what can be installed (excluding, of course, applications that are illegal or extremely resource-intensive).

Resource Allocation*- VPS vs. Shared Hosting:
In a Shared hosting environment, all hardware resources are shared among all users, with virtual limits set for the amount of bandwidth, disk space, and other resources available to each user. The individual users' resources are not in any way separated, nor can server performance be effectively monitored on a per-user basis, hence the notorious overselling, "unlimited" resource allocations, and poor performance too-often associated with Shared hosting.
On a VPS node (host server), each virtual server is allocated a "hard" amount of disk space, RAM, and other server resources. Though different virtualization techniques handle this slightly differently (see*OpenVZ vs. Xen: What's the difference, and which is better?), VPS resources are basically equivalent to actual "slices" of the physical hardware in a server: one slot of RAM reserved for one VPS, one CPU core reserved for one VPS, etc. These dedicated resources, combined with advanced per-user monitoring tools, make virtual private server hosting far more reliable than shared hosting.

Convenience*- VPS vs. Shared Hosting:
Although Shared hosting offers the convenience of a straightforward and easy-to-use control panel for server management (which can also be installed on a VPS), virtual private server hosting offers an even greater convenience: the ability to setup a customized system that can be painlessly upgraded or downgraded at any time. Due to the virtual nature of VPS hosting, where multiple "containers" coexist on the same host server,*administration of virtual servers is considerably more efficient than dedicated hosting, and has many more options available than Shared hosting.*Where a Shared host may simply suspend a user for a traffic spike or sudden increase in resource usage, a VPS host can seamlessly expand a virtual server's resource allocation to accommodate higher demand.


To answer the original question,*yes!*Make the move to a VPS today, and see why virtual servers are the fastest-growing trend in web hosting.



<Advertising URL removed>
 
i have been in the hosing business for 11 years started with reseller and then a master reseller acountwas quite happy and had a good clientbase, until after 4 years with the same host he messed me about so i took the leap to a managed VPS (as i had no clue how to run a VPS) and kicked myself on why i never moved to a VPS years before. they are relatively easy to maintain although i still like the managed option as it gives you a backup tech service if you need it. i now have 3 VPS
 
I suppose this thread should be pinned at lots of webhosting forums for newbies to finally get an answer whether they need VPS :)
 
Do not compromise what had been planned about for the web site just to meet the level of what can just be offered with the cheap web hosting package. Try to search for other cheap web hosting packages that offer the applications needed for the web site.
 
Can we find a guide on cloud servers on HD forum ?

Not that I am aware of a specific thread, but we have had many discussions on the subject of cloud hosting. Searching for "cloud" term would bring up plentiful of results.
 
Not that I am aware of a specific thread, but we have had many discussions on the subject of cloud hosting. Searching for "cloud" term would bring up plentiful of results.

How about if we start a new discussion thread on different platforms of cloud computing and their advantages ? :agree:
 
How about if we start a new discussion thread on different platforms of cloud computing and their advantages ? :agree:

Be my guest, bodhost! It would be especially great if your thread, instead of sounding like a generic article, raises interesting points and stimulates a real discussion on issues surrounding cloud hosting.
 
Be my guest, bodhost! It would be especially great if your thread, instead of sounding like a generic article, raises interesting points and stimulates a real discussion on issues surrounding cloud hosting.

Thanks Artashes, i will start a new thread and share to discuss on HD, also requesting you to share on your social networking profiles, to provide information to every visitor on their selection of cloud computing technology and their views on them...:)
 
Last edited:
It's a massive amount is misinformation and assumption ...

>Whether you are looking to upgrade from Shared hosting

*some* VPS are an upgrade from *some* providers shared hosting

>Shared hosting is the cheapest option, but also the least secure and lowest in quality

*some* shared hosting is low quality, just as *some* vps are low quality, and *some* networks/datacentres are low quality, quality is not defined by the service type, but by the policies, procedures, hardware, software and management providing the service

>dedicated servers are very secure and completely customizable

dedicated servers *might* be more secure, or less secure, entirely down to how they are managed and by whom.

>host servers are populated with multiple users

*might* be populated by multiple users

>yet every VPS environment is completely private

virtualisation technology dependant

>the control panel will be the user's only method of server administration

in shared hosting environments, the _user_ has no role in server administration, or ability to perform such duties

>a VPS user will have*complete*control over the system via the "secure shell," or SSH

An *unmanaged* VPS running a *nix operating system will provide the user *some level* of control, usually by SSH

>There are absolutely no limits imposed on a VPS beyond the limits of hardware

and virtualisation technology, and number of other vps running on the system if any

>individual users' resources are not in any way separated,

*might not* be controlled separately

>nor can server performance be effectively monitored on a per-user basis

*might not* be monitored individually

>virtual server is allocated a "hard" amount of disk space, RAM, and other server resources

entirely down to the virtualisation platform, and the configuration of the systems by the adminstrator, with the majority of VPS provider overselling in the 1000's of % the capabilities of the hardware

>virtual private server hosting far more reliable than shared hosting.

except when badly managed, oversold/over-contended or using low-grade hardware to compete on price.

>virtual private server hosting offers an even greater convenience:
> the ability to setup a customized system that can be painlessly
> upgraded or downgraded at any time

might be customisable, might be upgradable, usually at the cost of destroying all your data and having to start agin

>administration of virtual servers is considerably more efficient than dedicated hosting

except when compared to a dedicated server from a provider who has a high level of control and automation in place

>Where a Shared host may simply suspend a user for a traffic spike
>or sudden increase in resource usage, a VPS host can seamlessly

*may* not can, and the same level of control exists with large-scale deployments of shared hosting, clustering having been around a lot longer than virtualisation

>To answer the original question,*yes!*Make the move to a VPS today

unless you
a. dont know how to manage a server - in which case you'll be hacked and offline by tomorrow
b. need greater "power" for your site(s) in which case a dedicated or multiple load-balance dedicated servers might be a better solution
c. pick a complete muppet for your VPS provider
d. completely underestimate your resource requirements
or any of the 30 possible reasons that Shared Hosting will be better than a Virtual of Dedicated solution
 
I think this post was accurate overall, and a good starting point for those who have questions. VPS's are definitely the way to go if you want full control, my only concerns with them over shared hosts is uptime.
 
Back
Top