Hi all,

I am thinking whether should I get Un-metered 10 mbps or 4 Celeron 1.3GHz server from RS.

Here is the bandwidth:

Un-metered 10 mbps : around 3200 GB ($399 per month)
4 Celeron 1.3GHz : 1600 GB ($369 per month)

If I get 4 Celeron 1.3GHz, I get more servers and more power. But I need to minor each server to make them the same.

The server will serve html page and image only.

If you were me, which one will you take?

Since you will be serving only static pages, I would think one server is enough for you. Not sure what your plan is with 4 servers, but mirroring one server to each other and doing sophicated load balancing might not be easy. If I were you, I will probably get the unmetered option and, if I need a server backup, the $99 Celeron.

regards,
-dave

I would say the unmetered 10mbps.

10MBPS, if you need that much bandwidth you are going to need that 10mbps port just for yourself. I don't think you would want to share a 10mbps port with 19 other people would you? :)

Four servers, use DNS round-robin to split the bandwidth. Setting up a simply rsync between the servers would make it easy to keep them up-to-date with each other.

I like the idea of 4 servers because it adds a lot of redundancy in case one goes down (the one thing about RackShack is that support can be somewhat slow if there were a hardware problem for example so I would rather have 3/4 servers up and running for the 2-3 hours it might take to swap a drive).

I also like the Celerons because they're each on a 100 mpbs port rather than having the one server on a 10 mpbs port.

na unless ur doing something incredibly stupid resource wise you dont need 4 servers ;)

then again 3200GB a month - what you going to host to shift that amount of data!!!

Originally posted by terrastudios
na unless ur doing something incredibly stupid resource wise you dont need 4 servers ;)

then again 3200GB a month - what you going to host to shift that amount of data!!!
Exactly what I said when I read the post.:eek:

But, if they really need that much then I say go with the 10mbps.:D

Well, if he is hosting files available for download, 3.2TB isn't too much to download...

Well, it still is a lot :)

That's like millions of visitors each day :)

Originally posted by terrastudios
then again 3200GB a month - what you going to host to shift that amount of data!!! He said images and static pages. I would say, he's into one of the few really profitable bussinesses on the Internet that starts with a P :D

The only other stuff that get's that much bandwidth is warez and mp3 which RS kills as quickly as they come.

I would just get the unmetered server because it's got more bandwidth and is easier to administer.

Jan Derk

Yep, that's a lotta bandwidth that only the big P could possibly push out. As for round robin, that won't provide you with redundancy (as far as my understanding goes) - not being intelligent, it will just push traffic in the direction of a dead server with no regard for performance - i.e. one server goes down, you lose 25% of traffic. So, you'll need a load balancing solution for real redundancy; only gig in town there (IMHO) is a $15K Radware device, but then I could be *really wrong* :) My guess is if you wanted super duper reliability anyway, you'd be shopping with Rackspace not the other guys...

Bottom line, go for the more powerful machine, less bandwidth, add servers... it isn't like they cost a lot from that particular provider.

C

Aye true - but i didnt think rackshack allowed porn - (ok thats my excuse to try and cover up the fact i didnt think bout porn!!!) - sorry if they do - we just never have followed rackshack much.

I believe the short version is: they allow anything that's legal.

JD

You mean that's legal in the USA, right?

Probably, yes.

JD