Hi,

I am developing a site that I think might get alot of traffic. I am currently with site5.com and find the speed that my pages come up to be only mediocre. When I was with Aletia, they were much faster but of course horrifically unstable. I would really like some faster hosting for my new site, could anyone point me there?

I use http://www.dellz.com and they are pretty fast

http://www.pair.com

- Pair Networks...

Splashhost.com is fast.

Splashhost.com and Site5.com are both located at NAC, as is Pwebtech and others. The NAC network is pretty good.

The shared machine the one site I have at Site5 is on seems to be consistant in performance - we don't have any apparent 'speed' issues.

Pair.com has a terrific network, has good quality hosting services to offer as well, but be sure that you can live within their terms of service as they have a few terms that are more restrictive than 90% of most hosts out there.

Datapipe.com also has an excellent network. If you use a traceroute on them be sure to hit their IP rather than host name, because some days you'll see more than one host respond (different sides of the country) depending on where you are tracing from. Try 66.70.68.254 to see routes to one location.

Traceroute from multiple locations
http://www.tracert.com/cgi-bin/trace.pl

I would suggest you first talk to Site5 and determine first if what you are seeing on your site is an issue they can address or not.

As a former Aletia customer myself, I know exactly what you mean.

I have heard many good things about chatcircuit.net and made the switch to them earlier this week. Check out what others have said since I can't really be a strong testimonial to their services as a newbie.

But I will tell you that support has been outstanding - I've only needed them because of my dumb questions, not anything they've done. And they've been in business about 7 years or so (important to me since I've been through several Web hosts over the past few months that seem to go kerplunk).

Pages load extremely quickly and the prices are great. Just my 2 cents. I know there's a chatcircuit thread in the forum that may help as well.

Yes I aggree pair is super quick -Pricy but it is money well spent.

I have actually emailed site5 about the sluggish speed I am getting. They didn't know what the problem was, and said that they are on the same network as Aletia, so their speeds shouldn't be that much slower than Aletia's was.

I wonder if the machine that I am using as a shared server might be the issue? It is a AMD Athlon XP 1600+, I noticed that Aletia was running dual Pentiums that were close to 2 Gigs.... could this be the speed difference?

Originally posted by morphinelips
I wonder if the machine that I am using as a shared server might be the issue? It is a AMD Athlon XP 1600+, I noticed that Aletia was running dual Pentiums that were close to 2 Gigs.... could this be the speed difference?

Run some traceroutes from one of the public sites, that will show you if the latency issues you are experiencing are coming from the network (most likely) or if they have anything to do with the server resources (most unlikely, it really doesn't take much to serve up a web page).

This was the reply I recieved on the tracert page listed above:

traceroute to 24.58.83.85www.highboard.com (216.118.105.95), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 FastEthernet6-0.civ-service1.Canberra.telstra.net (203.50.1.65) 0.42 ms 0.393 ms 0.332 ms
2 GigabitEthernet0-0-0.civ-core2.Canberra.telstra.net (203.50.10.129) 0.704 ms 0.331 ms 0.331 ms
3 GigabitEthernet4-0-0.dkn-core1.Canberra.telstra.net (203.50.6.126) 0.547 ms 0.592 ms 0.619 ms
4 Pos4-1.ken-core4.Sydney.telstra.net (203.50.6.69) 4.566 ms 4.532 ms 4.674 ms
5 Pos2-0.pad-core4.Sydney.telstra.net (203.50.6.22) 4.69 ms 4.649 ms 4.75 ms
6 GigabitEthernet0-1.syd-core01.Sydney.net.reach.com (203.50.13.246) 4.658 ms 4.693 ms 4.701 ms
7 202.84.143.21 (202.84.143.21) 191.688 ms 191.723 ms 191.94 ms
8 i-13-0.paix-core01.PaloAlto.net.reach.com (202.84.251.49) 175.103 ms 174.846 ms 175.057 ms
9 sntcca2lce1.wcg.net (198.32.176.139) 175.261 ms 174.886 ms 174.971 ms
10 sntcca2lce1-oc48.wcg.net (64.200.210.177) 175.552 ms 175.781 ms 175.931 ms
11 chcgil1wcx3-oc48.wcg.net (64.200.240.93) 220.816 ms 221.079 ms 220.784 ms
12 nycmny2wcx3-oc48.wcg.net (64.200.240.38) 243.749 ms 243.562 ms 243.61 ms
13 nycmnyhlce1-oc48.wcg.net (64.200.87.110) 243.771 ms 243.808 ms 243.765 ms
14 nycmny2lce1-netaccess-atm.wcg.net (64.200.86.150) 245.057 ms 245.073 ms 245.288 ms
15 a9-0-0-1066.msfc1.oct.nac.net (209.123.11.245) 247.636 ms 247.414 ms 247.535 ms
16 207.99.16.214 (207.99.16.214) 248.7 ms 248.868 ms 248.594 ms
17 216.118.105.95 (216.118.105.95) 247.832 ms 285.345 ms 248.687 ms

That seems pretty slow, doesn't it? When I ran it from home most of the hops came in at 10 or 20 ms. But the connection from home is very inconsistant, sometimes I run it and get numbers similar to what is above...

Originally posted by morphinelips
This was the reply I recieved on the tracert page listed above:

traceroute to 24.58.83.85www.highboard.com (216.118.105.95), 30 hops max, 40 byte packets
1 FastEthernet6-0.civ-service1.Canberra.telstra.net (203.50.1.65) 0.42 ms 0.393 ms 0.332 ms
2 GigabitEthernet0-0-0.civ-core2.Canberra.telstra.net (203.50.10.129) 0.704 ms 0.331 ms 0.331 ms
3 GigabitEthernet4-0-0.dkn-core1.Canberra.telstra.net (203.50.6.126) 0.547 ms 0.592 ms 0.619 ms
4 Pos4-1.ken-core4.Sydney.telstra.net (203.50.6.69) 4.566 ms 4.532 ms 4.674 ms
5 Pos2-0.pad-core4.Sydney.telstra.net (203.50.6.22) 4.69 ms 4.649 ms 4.75 ms
6 GigabitEthernet0-1.syd-core01.Sydney.net.reach.com (203.50.13.246) 4.658 ms 4.693 ms 4.701 ms
7 202.84.143.21 (202.84.143.21) 191.688 ms 191.723 ms 191.94 ms
8 i-13-0.paix-core01.PaloAlto.net.reach.com (202.84.251.49) 175.103 ms 174.846 ms 175.057 ms
9 sntcca2lce1.wcg.net (198.32.176.139) 175.261 ms 174.886 ms 174.971 ms
10 sntcca2lce1-oc48.wcg.net (64.200.210.177) 175.552 ms 175.781 ms 175.931 ms
11 chcgil1wcx3-oc48.wcg.net (64.200.240.93) 220.816 ms 221.079 ms 220.784 ms
12 nycmny2wcx3-oc48.wcg.net (64.200.240.38) 243.749 ms 243.562 ms 243.61 ms
13 nycmnyhlce1-oc48.wcg.net (64.200.87.110) 243.771 ms 243.808 ms 243.765 ms
14 nycmny2lce1-netaccess-atm.wcg.net (64.200.86.150) 245.057 ms 245.073 ms 245.288 ms
15 a9-0-0-1066.msfc1.oct.nac.net (209.123.11.245) 247.636 ms 247.414 ms 247.535 ms
16 207.99.16.214 (207.99.16.214) 248.7 ms 248.868 ms 248.594 ms
17 216.118.105.95 (216.118.105.95) 247.832 ms 285.345 ms 248.687 ms

That seems pretty slow, doesn't it? When I ran it from home most of the hops came in at 10 or 20 ms. But the connection from home is very inconsistant, sometimes I run it and get numbers similar to what is above...

It's because you just did a trace from Australia...:homer:

Originally posted by 311


It's because you just did a trace from Australia...:homer:

Hehe...d'oh! :p

Does anyone have any other links to very fast hosting companies? The thread has sort of derailed with talk of site5.

Originally posted by morphinelips
I have actually emailed site5 about the sluggish speed I am getting. They didn't know what the problem was, and said that they are on the same network as Aletia, so their speeds shouldn't be that much slower than Aletia's was.

I wonder if the machine that I am using as a shared server might be the issue? It is a AMD Athlon XP 1600+, I noticed that Aletia was running dual Pentiums that were close to 2 Gigs.... could this be the speed difference?

After being sure that its not the network (or your own personal connection), then the two next things to look at would be the machine its on but perhaps also your site itself.

What is it? Can you put a link here or PM it to me? Is it static? PHP? CGI? etc? Details please :) and perhaps an answer will become clear...

we moved to pwebtech.com in may

happy with the speed

happy with my server

happy with the support and the admins

glad to be there....


el_g

Agree with the above.... NAC and pwebtech are great, been with them since around October last year.

Go to www.FutureQuest.net there is no one better for shared hosting.

I have never seen one single negative comment about them and they are the most honest host around. Just visit their forums (http://www.aota.net/forums/) for more info.

Jan Derk

I use http://www.ICUServices.com and they're very fast!

Click Here (http://www.cobaltconnection.com)

Best wishes :)

I'm actually not sure its not the network, I did a tracert this morning from my computer and had several "*"s on the NAC network.

Btw, the site I am refering to is: http://www.highboard.com

I think for an html site that it is one that has alot to load, both in terms of graphics, and iframes, and lots of DHTML.... i could accept that it is the site that is making it slow, except for the fact that I have occasionally put up simple template pages when I am working on a new site, and even a banner graphic and HTML is sometimes very slow.


Originally posted by mwatkins


After being sure that its not the network (or your own personal connection), then the two next things to look at would be the machine its on but perhaps also your site itself.

What is it? Can you put a link here or PM it to me? Is it static? PHP? CGI? etc? Details please :) and perhaps an answer will become clear...

Btw, futurequest looked really good until I saw that you there aren't any mySQL databases for the first two plans...that is kind of horrible.

Anyone else know of fast hosting companies?

i am with hostnexus.com and they have great speed:D

Originally posted by SuperDon
Agree with the above.... NAC and pwebtech are great, been with them since around October last year.

Are NAC and pwebtech the same company? I like the speed, redundancy, etc. there.. and have strongly considered them. The only thing keeping me from reselling for them is their requirement that you must purchase at least 5 plans for $100 (or is it $50, that wasn't clear to me). Also, I don't want to have to pay for 5 plans if I don't sell anything.

Originally posted by aingaran
I use http://www.ICUServices.com and they're very fast!


Wow! This host IS fast! Thanks for sharing this info because I've never heard of them. Got any more details on them?

Originally posted by chrisb



Wow! This host IS fast! Thanks for sharing this info because I've never heard of them. Got any more details on them?

Well, from everything I know, they are either venturesonline resellers or they have a dedicated with them.

Hope this helped...:)

Originally posted by chrisb
The only thing keeping me from reselling for them is their requirement that you must purchase at least 5 plans for $100 (or is it $50, that wasn't clear to me).

You need to purchase a minimum of 5 accounts at $100 retail/or $50 reseller price.

Ever since Alan changed the hard drive out about a week ago, I can't believe how fast Splashhost its now. It was always good but now it's really fast. Thanks Alan.

Originally posted by chrisb


Are NAC and pwebtech the same company? I like the speed, redundancy, etc. there.. and have strongly considered them. The only thing keeping me from reselling for them is their requirement that you must purchase at least 5 plans for $100 (or is it $50, that wasn't clear to me). Also, I don't want to have to pay for 5 plans if I don't sell anything.

Nah, NAC own the datacenter. Pwebtech just lease a sizeable proportion of it.

Matt

<removed>

Ah, splashhost looks good. :) thanks guys..

Originally posted by 311


Well, from everything I know, they are either venturesonline resellers or they have a dedicated with them.



If they are with VO, that's strange because Ventures Online's main site loads slower. ICUServices must be on a dedicated server, and the server VO's main site is on must be more crowded, is all I can figure. I wonder if other people's VO sites load as slowly as VO's main site?

Originally posted by 311


You need to purchase a minimum of 5 accounts at $100 retail/or $50 reseller price.

That's what their page said, but that seems muddy to me. Which is it; can I pay them $50 or $100? If I can just pay them $50, why would anyone pay them $100?

I also really like Pair, but too many restrictions there; and I like Superb too, but just can't see how to make their 3-mo. required min. payment plans work for resold accts.

Originally posted by chrisb
That's what their page said, but that seems muddy to me. Which is it; can I pay them $50 or $100? If I can just pay them $50, why would anyone pay them $100?


I think it works like this:

You could be a reseller if you sell atleast $50 worth of accounts at reseller price, (50% off regular.) OR you could sell $100 worth of accounts at regular price, (No discount) It wouldn't matter which one you choose as long as you maintain that amount per month.

If you still don't get me then, contact them... It's the best I could do.

Sorry. :bawling:

Originally posted by chrisb


If they are with VO, that's strange because Ventures Online's main site loads slower. ICUServices must be on a dedicated server, and the server VO's main site is on must be more crowded, is all I can figure. I wonder if other people's VO sites load as slowly as VO's main site?

I think the VO main site just gets a lot of visitors, whereas (what you said) ICUServices must be on a dedicated with a small amount of traffic.

So you're most likely right...:)

C I HOST

VERY FAST!!

Originally posted by fasteddie
C I HOST

VERY FAST!!

really...:rolleyes:

http://webhostingtalk.com/search.php?s=&action=showresults&searchid=418152&sortby=lastpost&sortorder=descending

Originally posted by fasteddie
C I HOST

VERY FAST!!

Hahaha, go check the search engine for ***** (aren't they starred out with some of theri spellings?)

<edit> NVM, cant even type C I Host without putting the spaces in, they star out hahaha :D

Originally posted by 311


I think the VO main site just gets a lot of visitors, whereas (what you said) ICUServices must be on a dedicated with a small amount of traffic.

So you're most likely right...:)


How did I miss a thread about us? ? :)

We have dedicated & co-lo servers with Ventures Online.

Zach

.... when will the sun come out?