Web Hosting Talk







View Full Version : 3 year reliability test


Curious Cat
09-07-2002, 01:52 AM
Can anyone recommend me any hosting company that they have been using for the past 3 years without experiencing any downtime?

coight
09-07-2002, 02:18 AM
Originally posted by Curious Cat
Can anyone recommend me any hosting company that they have been using for the past 3 years without experiencing any downtime?

That's not possible

Haze
09-07-2002, 02:27 AM
Originally posted by Myacen


That's not possible

Rob's got a point there.

Servers go down for a lot of reasons, 1 being updates. If its a windows box some updates require a reboot. If its a linux box, every kernel upgrade requires a reboot. Sometimes hardware goes bad and causes downtime.. its inevitable, it will happen. Your best bet is to find a host with a good rep. and make sure you always have a recent backup of your site.

octeto
09-07-2002, 02:53 AM
Originally posted by Curious Cat
Can anyone recommend me any hosting company that they have been using for the past 3 years without experiencing any downtime?

http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html

MotleyFool
09-07-2002, 03:02 AM
IF some one is having 3 years of 100% uptime it means that they are having old kernels [which may have many security holes], and definitely old hardware

Upto you if you want to host your site there..

300-350 days is the max. After that every host must change hardware in my opinion.

Curious Cat
09-07-2002, 04:44 AM
Or I should said unscheduled downtime. Because I consider those point that you guys mentioned as schedule maintenance. What I am referring to is sudden shut down of services without prior notice.

Just a little suggestion, may be the administrator can make a compilation of unscheduled downtime incident of each hosting company reported by the forumer. so at the end of each year we can actually tell who are the reliable one and who are not.

Jedito
09-07-2002, 06:18 AM
Originally posted by Myacen


That's not possible

Not really, doing round robin or something like that you can offer 100% uptime.
Of course, that could be quite expensive.

MotleyFool
09-07-2002, 09:25 AM
Well I am tempted to brag a little here! We have had 100% uptime for 217 days as of today! [with 2 hours scheduled downtime for Apache upgrade and 5 hours scheduled downtime for network upgrade by our NOC in all the 217 days].

But I still wouldn't give any uptime guarantee because redundancy is expensive and clients dont want to pay extra for higher than 99% availability.

dektong
09-07-2002, 10:37 AM
Originally posted by MotleyFool
IF some one is having 3 years of 100% uptime it means that they are having old kernels [which may have many security holes], and definitely old hardware

Upto you if you want to host your site there..

300-350 days is the max. After that every host must change hardware in my opinion.

Not if they have web server farm/cluster where you can take any one web server down and their site will still be up and running. They can upgrade the kernel, the OS, the hardwares and just leaving one web server up and their site will still be up.

Curious Cat
09-08-2002, 02:16 AM
Originally posted by MotleyFool
Well I am tempted to brag a little here! We have had 100% uptime for 217 days as of today! [with 2 hours scheduled downtime for Apache upgrade and 5 hours scheduled downtime for network upgrade by our NOC in all the 217 days].

But I still wouldn't give any uptime guarantee because redundancy is expensive and clients dont want to pay extra for higher than 99% availability.

Care to share what is your site?

jayglate
09-08-2002, 05:21 AM
My name server has 1 plus years uptime. a web server has over 7 months uptime. Mail server going on 2 years now.

Aussie Bob
09-08-2002, 05:23 AM
Originally posted by MotleyFool
Well I am tempted to brag a little here! We have had 100% uptime for 217 days as of today! [with 2 hours scheduled downtime for Apache upgrade and 5 hours scheduled downtime for network upgrade by our NOC in all the 217 days].

But I still wouldn't give any uptime guarantee because redundancy is expensive and clients dont want to pay extra for higher than 99% availability.
:) depends on what the server is doing. If it's got 40 resellers, then uptime is not going to be the same as if it's just hosting 1 site. :D

tazzy
09-08-2002, 12:06 PM
Depends what the one site is :D