I often see posts here which when someone states resources such as 5GB / 50GB / $25 (just an example), others say that for that price there must be overselling.

How do you determine that? Is there some sort of measurement that newcomers could use to evaluate whether hosts are overselling? For example, using 1G / 10GB / $xx as a guide? Or is it much more complicated than that?

Hi WebSpider,

Unfortunately, its a little more complex then that.

However, to use some averages - figure a server has between 400-900GB of bandwith and between 60-100 GB of usable disk space... (these are very basic generalizations and can vary greatly)

Now, every company has a different business model - specifically how much revenue they are trying to generate per server....

However, from a consumers perspective - you really need to look at this from another perspective. How many resources do you actually need? How many users do you want to share with? and what is your budget?

Based on your answers to the above questions and a general understanding of how many resources are available and how much a host is charging - you should be able to determine who is overselling and who isnt - also, you should be able to determine which host is a better fit for you based on your criteria and budget.

Some people feel that overselling is an acceptable practice, others feel that there is an overselling formula which can be safely followed, whereas others still avoid it altogether...

Not sure you can specifically say any of the approaches are "better" then the others - but, I do believe they all cater to a different audience and market segment...

Hopefully I havent caused even more confusion :)

For example, using 1G / 10GB / $xx as a guideIt does get more complicated from another certain point of view.

For example, even if we consider (by supposition) that 1gb / 10 gb / $10 can support a "non overselling" business plan, we can't necessarily say that a plan with 100mb /1GB / $1 (even paid yearly) does not involve overselling. That sum is so small that the associated support costs now become a very important burden, so the host might have to pack the servers quite a bit in order to lower costs and thus sustain that price. :)

Yes it does get quite complicated. Many factors have to be considered.

You have to know the industry and have to know how much things generally cost.

So if a host is using the most expensive hardware like RAID hdds and Xeon processors you know that the cost per gig is going to be more than a server with P3 1.6Ghz and a 5700 200gig IDE hdd.

Wherever the host is located, the hardware will cost approximately the same (if imported at lowest price). So if you know what is to be expected given the characteristics of a host for a certain cost, you can estimate similar services in other hosts and when you research them, and you can try and find the factors that create discrepancies.

For example Host A offers 1gig for $10p/m and Host B offers 10gig for $10p/m but it turns out that Host B has an uptime of 50% while host A has an uptime of 99%.

There's also the issue that the price alone does not determine the practice. A host could sell 1gb / 10 gb / $100 and yet pack the servers to the brim. There's no one to stop them. :)

Originally posted by ldcdc
There's also the issue that the price alone does not determine the practice. A host could sell 1gb / 10 gb / $100 and yet pack the servers to the brim. There's no one to stop them. :)

LOL! Very true. Guess thats what these forums are for - to find that sort of thing.

It's good to check the system load over an extended period of time :)

Originally posted by ldcdc
There's no one to stop them. :)
Sure there is :)

The customers could do their talking, by leaving.


Simon

Hahaha! :D True, but that's because I pictured them as an obvious bad host.

However, they could very well pack their servers rather close to that brim mentioned above (not overdo it, but playing the rather extreme overselling game nevertheless), and despite all that, market themselves as a high end host. As we all know, value is in the eye of the beholder. :)

Originally posted by ldcdc
Hahaha! :D True, but that's because I pictured them as an obvious bad host.

However, they could very well pack their servers rather close to that brim mentioned above (not overdo it, but playing the rather extreme overselling game nevertheless), and despite all that, market themselves as a high end host. As we all know, value is in the eye of the beholder. :)
Very true, Dan.

I think a provider like that, playing virtual russian roulette with servers/clients will always come unstuck though, to be honest.

Call it hosting karma, if you will :D

Simon

Thank you for all the replies and useful pointers.