Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


Advice - 2 servers or 1?
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.

Advice - 2 servers or 1?

twhstrtwhstr Member
edited April 2019 in General

I have a number of shared hosting accounts and an old cPanel dedi, all of which I'd like to replace/consolidate.

I was thinking of either getting 1x 16GB VPS or 2x 8GB VPS's with any of the reputable hosts.

Apart from the extra licenses (cPanel, CloudLinux, etc...), and having to manage two servers instead of one, it kind of comes out to the same price.

From a security/stability perspective, I was thinking two servers might be better than one - incase of compromise or malicious users.

What would you all advise?

Comments

  • If they're on different nodes you also have the added benefit of hardware redundancy.

  • @IncognitoBurrito said:
    If they're on different nodes you also have the added benefit of hardware redundancy.

    That's a good point!

  • I would probably want to get all three.

    Just to be sure.

    :)

  • Ha me too, but that would cost too much :)

    Thanked by 1uptime
  • Go for two or even go for smaller ones. If cpanel isn't first choice, why not directadmin. Then you have even better option in LET

  • YuraYura Member
    edited April 2019

    1x 16gb vps doesn't equal 2x 8gb vps

    With 2 VPS you get double CPU, double bandwidth, double drives, double IPs...

    From a security/stability perspective, I was thinking two servers might be better than one - incase of compromise or malicious users.

    If you have same password/keys for both servers there is no added security. Security is not measured in the quantity of hardware but in adherence to best security practices.

    Thanked by 1Saragoldfarb
  • datanoisedatanoise Member
    edited April 2019

    Don't put all your eggs in the same basket: two locations with two different providers can bring more stability. If you have a problem with a server half of your sites will still be up and running. You could even backup each server on the other node, or setup master/slave replication with auto failover.

    You can also benefit from different locations if all your traffic doesn't come from the same area: with a server in EU and one in NA for example, you can host each site on the server closer to its audience.

    Thanked by 1uptime
  • YuraYura Member

    @datanoise said:
    Don't put all your eggs in the same basket

    I saw and personally know many men who keep both balls in one nut sack. WHAT ARE YOUR SUGGESTIONS? Be realistic.

    Thanked by 2uptime Saragoldfarb
  • @Yura said:

    @datanoise said:
    Don't put all your eggs in the same basket

    I saw and personally know many men who keep both balls in one nut sack. WHAT ARE YOUR SUGGESTIONS? Be realistic.

    Just get rid of one.

  • @mrclown said:
    Go for two or even go for smaller ones. If cpanel isn't first choice, why not directadmin. Then you have even better option in LET

    Smaller? I've got 30-40 accounts, excluding add-on domains. I don't think smaller would be a good idea.

    cPanel all the way I'm afraid. It's what (my) users want/know.

    @Yura said:
    1x 16gb vps doesn't equal 2x 8gb vps

    Correct, I was referring to pricing. E.g. 2x 8GB is the same price as 1x 16GB with Linode.

    @datanoise said:
    You can also benefit from different locations if all your traffic doesn't come from the same area: [...]

    I don't have a requirement to be in different regions, both will be in the UK :)

    So far it seems 2 servers instead of 1 is what you're all recommending...

  • angstromangstrom Moderator

    @twhstr said: So far it seems 2 servers instead of 1 is what you're all recommending...

    Well, you shouldn't take every recommendation on LET seriously. If even well-intentioned, random people on LET don't necessarily know the details of your use case.

    In your use case, one server may make sense, especially if you need to use more than 8 GB RAM (or may need to do so in the near future). Also, it's probably easier to manage one server than two servers unless you have a way of automating things. And the licenses. (Malicious users can turn up everywhere, so although one has to be prepared for them, it's hard to anticipate them.)

    Thanked by 1Falzo
  • donlidonli Member

    3.

  • FranciscoFrancisco Top Host, Host Rep, Veteran
    edited April 2019

    twhstr said: So far it seems 2 servers instead of 1 is what you're all recommending...

    That only makes sense if the plans don't scale linearly.

    The 16GB plan should hopefully have 4x the CPU's, etc, as the 2x8G.

    You'd save a lot of money on licensing on the 16GB. While you'd get an extra IP, most hosts sell those for a couple bucks a month or less.

    TLDR - get a Slice.

    Francisco

  • twhstrtwhstr Member
    edited April 2019

    @Francisco said:
    TLDR - get a Slice.

    I would have aaaaaages ago if you had a UK location!

    That reminds me - when are you getting a UK location? Preferably London :tongue:

  • FranciscoFrancisco Top Host, Host Rep, Veteran

    twhstr said: That reminds me - when are you getting a UK location? Preferably London

    I don't feel like having to collect wanking licenses from my customers.

    Francisco

  • IkoulaIkoula Member, Host Rep

    Hello,

    You could also replicate your services on 2 and buy the VMs on 2 different hosting providers, this way you can have nearly no interruption event if one of the VM is down.

    Note : it also allows you to keep your services available while performing maintenance or updates.

    Greetings,

  • @Francisco said:

    twhstr said: That reminds me - when are you getting a UK location? Preferably London

    I don't feel like having to collect wanking licenses from my customers.

    Francisco

    Did you just low-key call your customers wankers?

  • @Francisco said:
    I don't feel like having to collect wanking licenses from my customers.

    Just DMCA the towel photo.

    Thanked by 1Francisco
  • FranciscoFrancisco Top Host, Host Rep, Veteran
    edited April 2019

    teamacc said: Did you just low-key call your customers wankers?

    The UK passed (or is trying to pass?) a law that requires people have a license/etc to go to adult websites.

    Going forward they're officially called wanking licenses.

    Francisco

    Thanked by 1poisson
  • @Yura said:

    @datanoise said:
    Don't put all your eggs in the same basket

    I saw and personally know many men who keep both balls in one nut sack. WHAT ARE YOUR SUGGESTIONS? Be realistic.

    If you're constantly dropping your balls on the floor, you probably shouldn't have balls.

  • LetzienLetzien Member
    edited April 2019

    1/2 server

  • YmpkerYmpker Member

    @Francisco said:

    teamacc said: Did you just low-key call your customers wankers?

    The UK passed (or is trying to pass?) a law that requires people have a license/etc to go to adult websites.

    Going forward they're officially called wanking licenses.

    Francisco

    lol

  • tafa2tafa2 Member

    @Francisco said:

    twhstr said: That reminds me - when are you getting a UK location? Preferably London

    I don't feel like having to collect wanking licenses from my customers.

    Francisco

    Couldn't you just update your T&C's to forbid adult content on your UK nodes?

    The wanking license only covers sites that directly profit from X rated material and/or the ones that have more than a 1/3 of adult content.

  • FranciscoFrancisco Top Host, Host Rep, Veteran

    tafa2 said: Couldn't you just update your T&C's to forbid adult content on your UK nodes?

    The wanking license only covers sites that directly profit from X rated material and/or the ones that have more than a 1/3 of adult content.

    Would go against our "law of the land" stance then.

    "Sorry sir you must ticket and provide your wanking license as proof".

    Francisco

  • deankdeank Member, Troll

    Wanking Provider, Frantech.

  • NeoonNeoon Community Contributor, Veteran

    I would do recommend split, if possible.
    Just imagine, that thing going down, with all your stuff on it.

    Its like divorce, just worse.

  • poissonpoisson Member

    Is the queen changing back to Victoria that's why now wanking licenses are needed?

  • VeespVeesp Member, Host Rep

    Managing one is surely easier than two, but if you want to have 99,99% Uptime and your audience is geographically wide than you can take two different locations and set up a load balancing. Generally, it depends on the use case. Besides, it's needed to benchmark that VPSes to answer the question, sometimes 1 VPS can have a better performance than 2 low-end ones.

Sign In or Register to comment.