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.
Comments
I thought we are talking about webhosting with dedicated ressources like you mentioned above (2 cores, 8gb ram, 64gb ssd + apiscp license for +30€.
So NL is the other possible european location you could offer?
For dedicated resource web-hosting clients i prefer spin up a vm (kvm) for them specifically. As this offers reasonable isolation and works to guarantee the available resources for them.
So in the billing-portal this can show up either as
a vps (if using third party nameservers) with options for self-management. To this we would be deploying an apiscp installation with a 30 domain limit and provide the client with access to the vm and the hosting panel.
OR as a dedicated resource web-hosting service (in this case, they only have access to their own dedicated web-hosting panel. and can make use of the MyRootPW name-servers.
I hope this clears it up nicely for you. In terms of pricing/resource allocation, both options would be the same.
Thank you very much. I will think about and what resources I need and will send you a message. What of moth mentioned options would you suggest?
Let me know whenever you are ready. I am not sure i understand your question. With regard to resources, we can later always add more cores memory if required.
Unless you want to spend all your free time maintaining an entire web stack, a shared hosting service is always going to be the best choice.
There are cases where shared hosting is not appropriate or applicable and that's where a VPS saves the day.
I personally use racknerd's shared hosting but I have a reseller service, it's working perfectly for me. Occasionally the server will be unavailable while there's a security update going on, but that's never more than a few mins per month IIRC.
Can you tell me which racknerd shared hosting location is better in terms of uptime and general performance - Los Angeles vs Miami, Florida.
When is shared hosting not appropriate?
I've RackNerd shared plan on their E3, and doing good.
But if you want a more premium hosting, on faster Ryzen, with DDR5 RAM, and NVMe, then try Hostbrr cpanel or directadmin plans in Europe, US, Singapore - they also come with 2CPU and 2GB RAM, the load are like 4 to 6 on 24 core server. Even Mike's Myw.pt is doing good with similar load on snappy server, and same specs. Also, BuyShared recently upgraded to Ryzen, so they're offering 1CPU, 1GB RAM, NVMe, and are quite good.
I haven't compared them all, plus there are multiple nodes per location which makes it harder again. My service is hosted on one of the Miami nodes and it's been great. It could be that it's a slightly less popular location than Los Angeles, but that's just my guess.
I was referring specifically to applications that are on the backend that aren't able to be run on a shared hosting service, for example, can you run Selenium with Python on shared hosting?
There's always going to be more premium, more faster, etc but because everyone has a different set of variables it's never a one-size-fits-all approach, and having many options from AWS right through to the guys you mentioned is a good thing.
I've played around with a lot of shared hosting in the past and honestly found RackNerd's to be the best fit for me, the price is very low and the service is surprisingly decent for the price.
My advice to anyone starting out is to just try a few different options available. Get a feel for the good stuff, see what the fuss is about, and then try the low end market, as hit and miss as it is there are some excellent deals here (on the mid-high end of the low end segment - not repuc/boomer/calin stuff either, that's the "Tremendously Low End" of the RF LET spectrum)
Just take a nice VPS and install Virtualmin