1
Xman04
What about Virtual Private Servers?
  • 2005/12/9 22:02

  • Xman04

  • Not too shy to talk

  • Posts: 180

  • Since: 2004/7/12


Hi everyone,

I've been doing a lot of research on shared hosting packages. My conclusion is that generous amounts of drive space and bandwidth are no guarantee that your site will function efficiently on a shared host. The details that most hosts don't tell you (or hide in the fine print), are that there are CPU usage restrictions and MySQL connection limitations. In addition, the efficiency of your site at any given time depends on the current resource usage of other sites on your shared server. At best, if a shared server is properly configured, you should be able to run a low traffic XOOPS site with satisfactory performance. From what I've researched, customers run into problems when traffic becomes moderate to high. This not only applies to Xoops, but especially to any web site that is dynamic/interactive in nature (uses forums, blogs, shopping carts, etc.).

The three traditional options for hosting are shared, semi-dedicated, and dedicated plans. Semi-dedicated has less restrictions and the resources are shared with less users. However, a resource hog can still slow down your site at various times. A dedicated server is ideal, but it costs a lot of money.

Today, I started looking into virtual private servers. "Supposedly," a virtual private server acts like a dedicated server in many ways.

Here are some of the "promoted" benefits of a virtual private server (VPS):

1) The CPU, Memory, and other resources are configured so each account is only allowed to use their allotted amount. This way, your allocated resources are always available to you, and cannot be drained by a spike in resource usage by another site. Another account cannot interfere with your allotted resources, which means you won't notice slowdowns at certain times.

2) The security is lot better on a virtual private server (in contrast to a shared server). This is because each account has its own file system. On a shared server, everyone shares the same file system, which means bad things can spread from one account to other accounts. This actually happened to me last week!

3) You have full control of your virtual private server, which means you can install your own software.

The above is what I've learned through some initial research. However, I still have questions. For example, I'm wondering how virtual private servers handle MySQL connections. Are there limitations on how many concurrent connections can be opened at the same time on a VPS, or is this not an issue? Are there any daily bandwidth limitations on a VPS? What is an adequate amount of RAM and CPU speed for a VPS package? Most importantly ,will a moderate to high traffic XOOPS site perform adequately on a VPS?

If anyone has any successful experiences with a VPS and can shed some light on the above questions, it would be very helpful. Also, some referrals to quality VPS plans would also be helpful. I'm hoping that VPS is a viable alternative to the inefficiencies of shared hosting and high costs of dedicated hosting.

Dave

2
Anonymous
Re: What about Virtual Private Servers?
  • 2005/12/9 22:10

  • Anonymous

  • Posts: 0

  • Since:


Thank you Xman04

It's intresting subject and i hope to learn more about the differents between dedicated and virtual hosting servers.

Can i ask you what's the different between virtual server and shared server ? still not clear

Thank you again

3
jdseymour
Re: What about Virtual Private Servers?

A VPS (Virtual Private Server) is a complete OS/server environment on your own partition on a server with multiple VPS. Through the management software of the VPS hosts can set a guaranteed and maximum (burst) amount of resources to each VPS.

Since each VPS runs it's own OS you are in full control of the settings of the VPS. You set the MySQL and PHP parameters, security and updates are your responsibility (On unmanaged plans). So it is in fact like having a dedicated server in many ways. And you do need to be sure that you do not max your resources. You do need to have some experience in the operating system you are using for the VPS, as a lot of the settings are done at the OS level.

Since I made my move from shared to VPS, I have renewed interest in all my sites. And I love learning the ins and outs of my server. I could not (yet) afford a fully dedicated server, but for now this will cover my needs.

I have also started an e-mail group (still fairly small) on yahoo groups for help in managing a VPS. The name is the Virtual Private Servers Users Group.. Only 3 members so far but I am still having fun with my virtual server.

4
Xman04
Re: What about Virtual Private Servers?
  • 2005/12/10 0:12

  • Xman04

  • Not too shy to talk

  • Posts: 180

  • Since: 2004/7/12


Hi Jdseymour and Mowaffak,

The primary advantage that interests me about virtual private servers, is that other sites on the main server won't have any effect on the performance of my web site. What concerns me about shared servers, is that the efficiency of my site will at least somewhat depend on the percentage of resources that other sites on the shared server are using. Thus, if someone sends out a huge bulk mailing from the shared server at 10:00 am, then my site may slow down to a crawl at that time, since the bulk mailer is utilizing so much RAM and CPU resources.

I'm assuming that with the virtual private server, the bulk mailer would not be allowed to over utilize the RAM/CPU beyond what is allocated to the account. Although, as jdseymour mentioned, you need to be careful not to max out your allotted resources. This is why I'm wondering how much RAM,CPU,and bandwidth is adequate for a moderate to high traffic XOOPS site (on a VPS). I know this is difficult to determine, but I think there should be some kind of guideline for this. At this point, I feel like I'm driving down the highway in super powered sports car (Xoops), but I don't know what the speed limit of the highway is (the host server).

Jdseymour, have you noticed any boost in efficiency in the way your site(s) handle traffic on a VPS?

Also, I'm very concerned about possible limits on concurrent MySQL connections. Is there a separate MySQL database server for each VPS account, which allows unlimited connections within the limits of the allotted RAM/CPU capacity? Or, do all the accounts on the main server still access the same shared database server?

By the way, I joined your VPS group earlier today under my yahoo ID. I think the group is a great idea! There really needs to be a lot more research/discussion and information available regarding hosting options. Xoops, just like any web system, will only be as good as its weakest link. If the host server cannot efficiently handle traffic, then the CMS will fail or work badly at best. I think there needs to be a standard guideline for minimum host server requirements for various levels of traffic (for shared, semi-dedicated, VPS, and dedicated options). I know that there is no extensive information on this at the moment, but it would be good if there was some place to start collecting and organizing this information. Input from the hosting companies would be good too, as long as they are willing to provide unbiased advice and not just a sales pitch.

Dave

5
jdseymour
Re: What about Virtual Private Servers?

Let me break the post down some and answer step by step.

Quote:
The primary advantage that interests me about virtual private servers, is that other sites on the main server won't have any effect on the performance of my web site.


You are guaranteed a minimum amount, other sites may affect your burst but not your minimum resources. My host claims to monitor server load every 5 minutes, if a site seems to be causing too much load on a server, through virtuozzo it can be moved to another in a few minutes.

Quote:
This is why I'm wondering how much RAM,CPU,and bandwidth is adequate for a moderate to high traffic XOOPS site (on a VPS). I know this is difficult to determine, but I think there should be some kind of guideline for this. At this point, I feel like I'm driving down the highway in super powered sports car (Xoops), but I don't know what the speed limit of the highway is (the host server).


My plan is the UM2 plan you can view Here.

Say you start with a smaller plan, if it does not meet your needs you can upgrade with no trouble but a service fee. Mine is great so far. I hear others talking of hosting sites like a reseller, so it must work pretty well.

Quote:
Jdseymour, have you noticed any boost in efficiency in the way your site(s) handle traffic on a VPS?


Yes, but still learning to get better performance.

Quote:
I'm very concerned about possible limits on concurrent MySQL connections. Is there a separate MySQL database server for each VPS account, which allows unlimited connections within the limits of the allotted RAM/CPU capacity? Or, do all the accounts on the main server still access the same shared database server?


My server (originally) did not have MySQL installed. I had to install it myself. You need to remember that this is your OS, your server, your apache, your MySQL, and any other programs you choose to install. The only limits (besides resources) my host places is no IRC programs.

You have full root access, all controls are in your hands.
Anyway I hope this makes sense to you. I see you are doing your homework like I did before I made the move.

6
Everyday
Re: What about Virtual Private Servers?
  • 2005/12/17 2:26

  • Everyday

  • Just popping in

  • Posts: 11

  • Since: 2005/12/15


I have extensive experience in the hosting industry and its been my main business for over 6 years. I've sold, installed and used VPS's from swsoft (vituozzo), ensim, vmware and sphera.

Ensim was the top of this game for a long time but have fallen of drastically of late. The main advantage to their system was that it was a true VPS. There was a management level loaded to the server and then partitions. Any OS could be loaded and managed exactly as a dedicated server.

Vmware is basically the same as ensim. It's completely independent and very stable, like ensim use to be. As with ensim and vmware you could only split up the memory and processor in "real time". There is no way to oversell the server resources. This leaves you with a maximum of maybe 6 to 8 VPS's with 512 mb ram to a box.

The issue you need be aware of with virtuozzo is two fold. The first is that their "independent os" is actually based off an install template. If you modify the os in any way and they apply a patch it will overwrite certain files you customized. Also there are some base root files that are shared among all the users. The other thing, and of far more concern, is that with virtuozzo is that the host can oversell the processor and memory. This is how swsoft tells the host they can have 100's of VPS's on a box. They are banking on no one using their resources all at the same time.

I've had a lot of experience with these and I would recommend finding a host that offers ensims vps (if you can find one anymore) or vmware. Virtuozzo really is nothing more than fancy shared hosting.

Alternatively for the prices of dedicated servers these days you could practically pick one up for the price of a VPS. What would be a better idea is for a few users here to just go in on a dedicated server and host their sites off it. Simple and easy way to go. If anyone needs any help or advice in the hosting realm feel free to hit me up. I'm loving XOOPS so far and this cimmunity has been great so far.

7
hydrO
Re: What about Virtual Private Servers?
  • 2005/12/24 20:40

  • hydrO

  • Not too shy to talk

  • Posts: 105

  • Since: 2004/1/8 8


I have been moving from one shared hosting to another shared hosting for over 2 years, and now I think its time for me to find another solution.

I have tried to minimize the load within XOOPS system, but so far managed to get this far. I guess shared hosting is not suitable for XOOPS sites with moderate to high traffic.

I am looking for VPS now and was thinking of asking you guys what range of RAM would suit me for a start. The UM2 plan linkprovided by jdseymour interests me a lot, but i am not sure if it would be alright for me.

Thanx in advance.
Download Dhivehi mp3s
[size=x-small]www.gnatoll.com[/size]

8
Xman04
Shared and VPS hosting considerations
  • 2005/12/25 0:44

  • Xman04

  • Not too shy to talk

  • Posts: 180

  • Since: 2004/7/12


Hi hydrO,

I've been doing a lot of research regarding XOOPS and shared hosting. My conclusion is that shared hosting is only appropriate for certain kinds of traffic patterns. Shared hosting will work if you have moderate to high traffic that is spread out over time. If you have a moderate to high traffic volume during certain times or all the time, then your site will probably slow to a crawl or lockup quite frequently (if your host doesn't shut you down before that happens). However, if the traffic isn't concentrated within certain time periods, then shared hosting may work out.

The most important consideration regarding moderate to high traffic is how concentrated that traffic is. Having 1500 registered members doesn't really tell us how it will affect the efficiency of Xoops. If many of the 1500 members tend to visit the site between 7:00 and 10:00 PM on weeknights, then the site will likely experience problems during that time, since it will be a struggle to obtain the necessary CPU/RAM/MySQL resources in a shared environment. If on average, the 1500 members tend to sporadically visit the site throughout the month, then there is less likely to be high concentrations of traffic at certain times.

Another factor to consider is the length of time that the average visitor tends to remain active on the site. If the average visitor just briefly visits the site to check for the latest news or updates, then the combined demand (of all current visitors) on resources at any given time will tend to be less (on average). However, if the average visitor tends to hang around for a while and move around the site quite a bit, then the combined demand (of all current visitors) on resources will tend to be higher (on average)

The big difficulty is determining how your traffic will behave prior to setting up an XOOPS site. Educated or common sense guesses may or may not be on the mark. The best information comes from observing what happens after the site goes live. Although, a frequently crawling or crashing site may turn away lots of visitors, and it is very hard to recover visitors once they leave in frustration. Thus, if you can afford a VPS or dedicated server, then I wouldn't bother experimenting on a shared server.

As for shared hosting, I don't know where the dividing line is between acceptable resource usage and resource usage that pulls down the efficiency of the site. There are many other factors that complicate this, such has how graphic intensive your site is, how many modules there are to use, how efficient the modules operate, how often other sites on your shared server drain the server's resources, and the limits that the host establishes for concurrent database connections and CPU usage (the hosts usually don't clarify this until there is a problem, or unless you ask or spend a lot of time looking for the fine print).

As for VPS, the more I research it, the more I like the sound of it. It "appears" that a VPS is much more able to handle an XOOPS site with a significant volume of traffic. I've been told that 256MB of RAM on a VPS will adequately handle a moderate traffic database driven site. 256MB of RAM seems to be the low end and cheapest of VPS packages. Although, for a moderate traffic site, I would probably look for at least a 512MB RAM package, with 1GB of burstable RAM (that is just my preference though, and I don't have any experience with a VPS to back that up). The only problem is that the price tends to jump quite significantly for 512MB packages.

Anyway, I'm going to put a low to moderate traffic XOOPS site on a shared server soon. I expect/hope that the traffic will be spread out enough, so that the server will handle it satisfactorily. I will let everyone know how it turns out. I also have plans for another site, but I'm waiting until I can afford a VPS, since I believe that the traffic will be too high and concentrated for a shared server.

Dave

9
hydrO
Re: What about Virtual Private Servers?
  • 2005/12/25 11:30

  • hydrO

  • Not too shy to talk

  • Posts: 105

  • Since: 2004/1/8 8


Thanx for the tips xman04,

I am taking all this into consideration. My hosting company tells me that this usage problem could have started since I changed the main theme of the site. I removed the footer completely while chaning the theme.

Would removing footer have resulted in excessive usage of system at all?
Download Dhivehi mp3s
[size=x-small]www.gnatoll.com[/size]

10
jdseymour
Re: What about Virtual Private Servers?

I do not see how that would affect anything. Maybe if you added large images or something.

I know that after I tuned MySQL on my server, I have seen a pretty big performance boost on the 2 sites I have there.

Login

Who's Online

150 user(s) are online (98 user(s) are browsing Support Forums)


Members: 0


Guests: 150


more...

Donat-O-Meter

Stats
Goal: $100.00
Due Date: Mar 31
Gross Amount: $0.00
Net Balance: $0.00
Left to go: $100.00
Make donations with PayPal!

Latest GitHub Commits