New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
SSD Shared Hosting ?
So, some of the hoster provide SSD Shared Hosting. Is the speed difference is noticeable ?
I believe the provider will throttle the SSD Speed to prevent abuse. Hence my next questions. Which one is better, HDD VPS or SSD Shared Hosting ? in terms of disk read/write speed.
Comments
In almost all cases it is limited by CloudLinux but it'll still allow the host to put many more accounts on a server. (plus everyone has different CF disk limits)
Have you considered a SSD VPS?
Every host limits the IO to a certain level, I would say the main performance boost is on the seek time (Which increase response time during loads)
Because you offer SSD VPS? Come on, this is not WHT. Either apply for a provider tag or keep your sig flashing out.
So, what's the point of having SSD Shared Hosting if the speed is just the same with HDD Shared Hosting. From this point of view the advantage is for the provider. It can oversold his service more.
I can't list all of the things, I'm not that big into shared web hosting, and my only shared server uses HDDs (the only thing I sell that doesn't use SSDs). I never have a problem with CloudLinux and LiteSpeed.
Shared hosting: I've always noticed a positive difference when a host moved to SSD. With some hosts the speed improved by 25% and with others over 100%.
I'm currently using ramnode, they're good. They were better when I first signed up, their CPU load wasn't maxed out then. Now it seems like the CPU load of the shared hosting server I'm on is always maxed out.
VPS: Best disk read/write I've experienced (not just read about) was with @VMHaus' NVMe storage.
When did he start offering shared hosting?
For a production will go for a vps. For a hobby website go for shared hosting.
I am not talking about VPS. I am talking about shared hosting.
I just want to know is the so called SSD Shared Hosting is Real or just a marketing Gimmick. Since the cloudlinux / the provider will just limit the Read/Write speed of the disk anyway.
Seek time, as a HDD requires to physically move to get to the data you request, and if a HDD gets many requests , you will be waiting in a queue. SSDs seek time is much lower, allowing them to offer greater IOPS. The limits, are just that, limits, the resources are not guaranteed.
IO limit on SSD Hosts is usually much higher than HDD ones. (if your shared hosting provider isn't a complete idiot)
You can find here the limits that CloudLinux suggested to be used on one of their webinar : https://image.slidesharecdn.com/optimizingcloudlinuxoslimits-160609162843/95/how-to-optimize-cloudlinux-os-limits-11-638.jpg?cb=1465489801
In an oversold SSD shared environment, you would more likely to run out of network capabilities or CPU rather IO/IOPS on a SSD drive.
In SSD shared hosting, the SSD is hardly the bottleneck.
In HDD shared hosting, the HDD is most likely the bottleneck, that is why some HDD shared hostings are running behind varnish cache and such.
Sorry I was mentioning VPS over there. Corrected.
ramnode shared server (NL2) has been pretty good when it comes to load, but recently it has been high... i don't know if they have oversold it to MAX. @Nick_A maybe should check this once...
Its different.
if you want to try, find host with the same IO specs in HDD and SSD. then you can compare.
I've also experienced the higher loads at ramnode shared. Although there is no impact yet I hope everything will get sorted :P
Maybe we should start offering NVMe Shared?
Please open a ticket with what you're seeing and we'll take a look. Nothing should be close to max load.
Not before adding the US West location to your VPS services!
from hosting / hoster level, yes there would be large performance boost, but only when loading file and db.
from visitor level is very small, because depend on too much variable. prefer to use CDN if concern in this issue.
the conclusion is ssd always better than hdd. if you can afford ssd, go for it.
Check back next week! We are in the midst of configuring our core routers and nodes in US
How about Asia (SG/MY) NVMe?
I have a shared hosting plan with ramnode, and the server I'm on ( atlshared3 ) averages around 0.5-1. I'd assume it's because the server is new / doesn't have a lot of customers on it. ( yet? )
@vmhaus I'd be interested if it was located in US West.
@vmhaus, this ^.
@yokowasis, even if the IOPS are the same(limited), the seek time, latency and throughput between SSD and HDD are like night and day.
Ok, thanks for all of your information. I know what to do know.