I am interested in what are the advantages and disadvantages of dedicated and raq servers?

I see raqs which are expensive but less features than
dedicated, e.g. RAM, Bandwidth etc

what would be the best solution for a site which is completely database driven?

Thanks,
I did do a search but didnt find a post related to it, if there is please point me there :)
Sorry if this is the wrong forum :(

raq is slow and ugly , along with linux security holes. Best suit for start-up.

Raqs are smaller than many other servers and many ISPs like them for that reason; however, the major difference is that Raqs come with a very expensive user interface.

Essentially, a raq4 is $1500 of hardware, $0 of free software (operating system, web server, mail server, etc.) and $3000 of perl scripts.

(Put another way, with $4500 you could either buy a raq4 with two 5400 RPM IDE drives, 512MB RAM, and a 450MHz K6 processor, or you could buy a server with two hot-swappable 10000 RPM SCSI drives, 1GB RAM, and two Pentium III 1GHz processors).

If you're going to be running lots of web sites and want an easy tool to manage them all, you might want to consider a Raq. If you only have a single site you definitely do not want a Raq.

Personally I don't like cobalt RAQ because it's setting.
I heard a lot of complains that many cgi-scripts won't work in RAQ box.

While on the other hand, RAQ only could handle 250 domain name/box (not sure about it, CMIIW)

Originally posted by jakis
raq is slow and ugly , along with linux security holes. Best suit for start-up.

security holes?

Originally posted by sodapopinski
I heard a lot of complains that many cgi-scripts won't work in RAQ box.

That's right.

slow slow slow

Don't buy one. You are better of when you are buying a normal *nix server with for example http://www.smarthostingtools.com/ That's what I'm going to do when my dedicated server contract has been finished. But that will be in December :(:(

I'm pleased with my RAQ4 - I've had no real problems, although the ASP support/side is not excellent, but it does work. The control panels make life easy, and saves me time. This is my first sever, and I have no Unix experience but I've had no problems setting up users / sites. I would say that this is a perfect starting point for us Unix dummies, but there are probably better things out there. As for price, I've only got a basic RAQ4 and its cost me £1000 (GBP) per year to rent with 5gb bandwidth - So I'm moving all my sites to it and saving a small fortune. Speed wise it seems ok too - Can't say it's slowed done much, but I've not put much load on it yet. Just my 2cents worth :)

Originally posted by Starhost
... But that will be in December :(:(

LOL :D
But hey, why don't you try to sell your contract to someone else?


<< Removed the bold from the message>>

[Edited by kunal on 02-21-2001 at 11:32 PM]

I can't imagine someone who wish to have a raq3 in the Netherlands. Or do want to buy the contract from me?!? :D:D

Just let it be and start over with a real server.

We have a RAQ3 here too and it runs fine. When we hit the 100 user level we get ourself a more powerfull one.
raqs are good to start with.

But after a while you can see the disadvantages of it and you move along.

You can buy a Control Panel for your new server too you know.

l8r