What do you think of all the different types of virtual servers that hosts are now offering? VDS, VMWare, etc. Is this the wave of the future?

Is *** complete and virtuozo the best deal for the money? You can find them for $10-$20/month.

Hmmm... those ***'s should say H S P - Complete.

What other software can do VDS or VPS? Only easy I have seen is H S P and it seems a little HIGH in price.. Is there any thing else that you can just say make a VPS some thing simple no CP or any thing?

I have been kicking around the idea but never seem to find any good software for it.. :(

Hmmm, H S P complete is cheaper than VMware though, isn't it?

These newer alternatives in the last few months have given those Ensim Virtual Server hosts some competition.

What do you think of usadomains.com? and they have a fairly good control panel too.

Also, I think I read that BSD's jail can create a virtual server.

H S P complete from what I have heard charges like per Mhz of the CPU the control panel is on. So if you had a dual PIII 1000Mhz it would cost you $2000 for the CP on just that server.

Yeah, that's high if that's true. I can't imagine a company charging by CPU size. That's crazy. Course if you could afford one of those 64-bit IBM mainframes, I guess that wouldn't bother you. :)

On another note, I noticed remarkablehosting has lowered it's ensim virtual server prices to $59. Were $79 last time I checked.

ensim came out with a new pricing plan which has allowed most hosts to lower their VPS solutions

Steve

A VPS/VDS should be an environment in which each VPS/VDS account will have a guaranteed servers resources allocation; a true VPS/VDS solultion will have a guaranteed CPU/memory allocation. Many so call "VPS/VDS" solutions such as FreeBSD Jail or FreeVSD (for Linux) only gives you a chrooted environment but without any resources allocation. I don't believe this should be considered a VPS/VDS but rather a more secure shared environment. Without guaranteed resource allocation any such "VPS" account will still have the capability of consuming most if not all of the server's resources at the expense of other "VPS" accounts. So I will just call these kinds of "VPS" accounts a chrooted shared account instead.

A resource management/allocation is the key to any VPS. Make sure you get a true VPS when you need one :)

FHDave who would you say is the best for this H S P or some one else?

Originally posted by Vortech
FHDave who would you say is the best for this H S P or some one else?

I think it's rather early to really say which one is the best. H S P is still young compared to Ensim or VMWare, but I do believe H S P (or Virtuozzo) has the potential to be the best. Of course I also can't say which one is the best since I have never used Ensim or VMWare :)

As of ourselves, we use H S P/ Virtuozo because it's rather unique in its implementation. For example, Virtuozo allows you to create up to 1000 small VPS under one server, something that you can't really do with VMWare.

But I do agree, the charge by Mhz will be too expensive once you start to consider using Dual Xeon 2Ghz (for example). I do think SW Soft needs to rethink about their licenses charge to make it more affordable especially for the high end servers :)

Originally posted by Keeg
ensim came out with a new pricing plan which has allowed most hosts to lower their VPS solutions

Steve

Care to share your pricing? PM me. ;)

Thanks Dave for bringing up resources. I was wondering if a VPS guaranteed a certain amt of CPU and RAM. Course shared hosting doesn't guarantee that either most of the time.

I think it would come down to market forces and how well shared hosting delivers to its clients. What % of shared hosting accounts are saying to themselves, "Hmmmm, I really need a dedicated amount of server resources and must go for a VDS platform" ? A tiny %, IMO.

The more folks who want that service, then the more providers who will offer that service. Supply and demand have a quirky way of being pretty even, over time.

I'd personally like to see VDS as the norm in the years to come, but it's all dependant on pricing/demand etc....

Originally posted by FHDave
As of ourselves, we use H S P/ Virtuozo because it's rather unique in its implementation. For example, Virtuozo allows you to create up to 1000 small VPS under one server, something that you can't really do with VMWare.
I guess with the true VDS platform, the number of VDS accounts per server would be a real limiting factor etc. If you carved up 1000 VDS accounts on a server, how would each of those domains function only getting 1/1000th of the server's resources? Am I missing something here?? :confused:

Originally posted by chrisb
Thanks Dave for bringing up resources. I was wondering if a VPS guaranteed a certain amt of CPU and RAM. Course shared hosting doesn't guarantee that either most of the time.
Ahhhhh, shared hosting doesn't guarantee that any of the time. It's first come, best dressed.

Right, Bob... "any" of the time.

How ya been? I haven't seen you since I talked to you in a recent thread that got removed. :) I noticed umBilly followed my reply in that thread; but I never got to see his reply. <sigh>

and while I'm here, WTH does that new warning 0 thing in the posts mean?

I don't see how you could divide a server up by 1000 either. Even if you had a the latest P4 2.8 GHz that's 2800mhz/1000mhz=2.8mhz. I wouldn't want a guarenteed 2.8mhz :stickout: I'm thinking you need multiple processors in order to utilize the 1000 feature but then again I don't know your server configuration ;)

I guess it's just nice to be able to have 1000 VPSes on one server even though it's not plausible.

Originally posted by Aussie Bob
I guess with the true VDS platform, the number of VDS accounts per server would be a real limiting factor etc. If you carved up 1000 VDS accounts on a server, how would each of those domains function only getting 1/1000th of the server's resources? Am I missing something here?? :confused:

I said it is capable of making 1000 Virtual Enviroments (As they call it) on each server. But I myself won't do that. However, if you just create 300 of these, then it's still much better than having 300 shared accounts hosted on your server, isn't it? Another key point is that we all know that the server is not being utilized at the same time by all accounts, hence you can safely put 300-500 of small Virtual Environments, which is much better than putting 300-500 of shared accounts on your server. In the (near) future, H S P will become a unique solution replacing the traditional hosting. We are looking forward for it :)

Originally posted by JonL
I don't see how you could divide a server up by 1000 either. Even if you had a the latest P4 2.8 GHz that's 2800mhz/1000mhz=2.8mhz. I wouldn't want a guarenteed 2.8mhz :stickout: I'm thinking you need multiple processors in order to utilize the 1000 feature but then again I don't know your server configuration ;)


But you do think it's plausible to host 1000 sites on one Dual P4/2.8Ghz, do you? In fact, in the case of shared hosting, a site can get much less than 1/1000 of a server resources. Well, just one site can consume 99% of the server resoruces, leaving 1% to be shared by 999 (or 300, whatever) of other sites. Do you think this is better?

There are some people who just like to talk without knowing what they are talking about, I guess. I don't care what you think is plausible or not, the fact is Virtuozo has been tested with 1000 VE (Virtual Environments) on a server. At least, if you don't understand how, you may ask instead of giving us your baseless opinion ...

Some people :rolleyes:

In the (near) future, H S P will become a unique solution replacing the traditional hosting. We are looking forward for it

Umm... not likely at those prices. Sphera has a similar appraoch with multiple VDSs, but they too are not priced well enough to compete in a shared world right now. Remember, advertising VDSs at $20/mo doesn't mean anything to a person wanting to pay $10.00/mo for 'hosting'. Until the hosting customers are educated to understand the value of VDS, they are not going to part with extra dollars when shared hosting is just fine for 99% of the world.

On a side note, I would love to see Ensim release a lower end product like Sphera that allows more VDSs/server.

Originally posted by FHDave

There are some people who just like to talk without knowing what they are talking about, I guess. I don't care what you think is plausible or not, the fact is Virtuozo has been tested with 1000 VE (Virtual Environments) on a server. At least, if you don't understand how, you may ask instead of giving us your baseless opinion ...

Some people :rolleyes:

Huh? JonL was asking and trying to assess it with logic. What's wrong with that?

FHDave, I didn't mean to start a flame and I'm sorry if I offended you.

Originally posted by chrisb
How ya been?
Busy breeding and expanding the empire. :D
I haven't seen you since I talked to you in a recent thread that got removed. :) I noticed umBilly followed my reply in that thread; but I never got to see his reply. <sigh>
Damnit!! UBC, PM me what you wrote. ;)
and while I'm here, WTH does that new warning 0 thing in the posts mean?
That is there for trouble makers like you and SoftwareRevue. :D

There's a thread (http://webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=85810) in the Suggestions forum. It's so mods can control who can post where. So if you've been bad ;) then you won't be able to post in the ad forums etc....:)

So can a semi-heavy site still function properly only having 1/300th of the server's resources? :confused:

Think of this from the other direction. H S P does not work like ensim. Ensim completely divides a server in VPS's each having it own version of the os, control panel, etc. The ensim servers then require a certain amount of resources ALL the time just to run. This is why when you give someone a 1 gig account they really only get 400 to 500 mb on average.

With H S P C each account basically gets a mirror of the operating system. So if you give someone a gig of space, they get a gig. With the system working this way each VE does not need to have a certain amount of resources to run. It is guaranteed a certain amount of resources if the server gets busy and that VE needs it, but if it doesn't than it uses virtually nothing. The nice part is that it can burst and use more resources if it needs to, but this still won't cause the whole server to go down if someone is spamming for example.

Those are the main differences between ensim and H S P C. Hope that helps :)

There are really only two commercial players in the VPS hosting market, as mentioned Ensim and H S P C.

Both H S P C and Ensim use the same scheduling technology and I am fairly certain (not positive) that Ensim is capable of creating VPS's that allow but do not consume resources just like H S P C.

The pricing is also pretty fair, though steep for a startup or a reseller the ROI is not real bad if you can sell the VPS'. Obviously to target the same audience that cheap shared hosting generally attracts would be a bad idea, but there is a huge market for VPS hosting.

Also, the light version of their VE's can provide a viable low-cost alternative to shared hosting but without the limits. You can safely disable PHP safe_mode, install mod_perl, and provide your customers with the peace of mind that their files are NOT available to other customers simply because Apache is semi-flawed in it's current state (1.3.x release). Further, if one customer needs GD2 but others require GD1.6 or something embedded into PHP, you can provide that.

DizixCom funny you said some thing about GD as we are having problems with that now.. :)

So if some one was to say what is the best and easy to use VDS or VPS software what would it be?

I have the same issue with GD2 since I run HSPHERE as well. :)

I've been research this stuff for 8 months, starting with FreeVDS, trying to squeeze information out of an Ensim sales rep who basically told me "You can't afford that yet", working with FreeBSD's jail() system call and kernel hacks (beyond my coding expertise I'm affraid, I do frameworks not system code), and finally landing on H S P Complete. I'd have to say the best and most easiest system to use has been that final one.

PM me if you want more details, some things cannot be brought out due to non-disclosures but I can put you in touch with the right person.

Well i just got off the phone with H S P.. They seem very nice and I think we may end up working with them.

Did you find any way around the GD2 problem with H-Spheres pre-installed conter?

I haven't spent much time looking to be quite honest. I rebuilt PHP with libcurl just the other day, but haven't gone as far as implementing GD 2.0 out of fear that other things would break. I will be trying it on a test H S P C VE before proceeding to the HSPHERE upgrade. Another nice thing about running H S P Complete is the ability to create virtual servers on the fly and feel free to trash them. I used to do this with FreeBSD jails, but that was more involving and wasn't always as good for testing.

I just read Allan's article in Hostingtech about VDSs. No offense to Allan or Dave, but why is this article written like this is some new idea or technology. I felt it was like someone discovered a rock that someone else left behind on there way to something new. VDSs have been out for a long time and the ideas behind them haven't changed other then maybe a lower cost of entry. Once of the best articles I have seen regarding this was written by Matt at Remarkable

http://www.webhostdir.com/news/articles/showarticle.asp?id=484



PS - Allan, are you getting kickbacks from Rackshack? :)

That is a good description of a VPS in laymans terms.

I like the idea of a VPS but I'm not a big fan of ensims serverxchange. Since they were one of the first to put it into an automation system I feel they gained the current market share they have that way. If they introduced serverxchange today as a new product it would be light years behind H S P C O M P L E T E. Actually, what am I saying? It IS light years behind.

True that it is loosely based on the same technology, sw s0ft offers a far superior product in **** then serverxchange could ever hope to be.

Now I'm reading this thread and people are debating the fact that some outside solutions (Ensim, H S P C) are able to divide both the server into VPS/VDS and also divide system resources. Now in my mind I would rather use the jail method of FreeBSD with some modifications and share the resources.
Most resources are used in bursts anyway, the same as your bandwidth. So again, not every person is using the entire set of resources at any one time. If any does start to abuse resources, that's what Sys Admins are for, and there are plenty of alert tools to notify of problems server side and allow for regulation, or some other action. The upside is that you are allowed a 'burst' as you need it. I know some hosts restrict certain times for running CPU intensive scripts during the wee hours to not impact customers.
And at the end of the day, the safest bet for customers is to just get a dedicated. With the costs of dedicateds these days, it's pretty reasonable.
The question every customer needs to ask themselves is not...how cheap can I get hosting, but how much is my business worth. If I pay $5-10/month for hosting, I'm probably getting what I pay for. So if there are problems down the road, can I fault the company I'm hosting with and blame them that "I'm losing thousands of dollars" for my $10/month hosting account being down?

Sometimes it means paying a little to get a little more. I also read the comment that part of hte problem is that many people looking for hosts aren't educated about Shared Hosting/VPS/VDS and how it's setup. I would agree. And that's what leads to confusion on why 1 company charges $10 and another $20-30 but just going by Space/Bandwidth, they look the same.

Go Spry.com quality VDS/VPS solutions and home of the Root Server :)

Originally posted by m0nkeyhost
And at the end of the day, the safest bet for customers is to just get a dedicated. With the costs of dedicateds these days, it's pretty reasonable.
Yep, I agree, but it also depends on the pricing of the VPS/VDS etc. Maybe for most folks, the jump from $40-75/mth to $150-200/mth is not workable. Therefore a VPS/VDS is their best option. Many options for many different circumstances. :)

True, and in that case I would make sure I investigated the company to find out for the $40-75/mth how many accounts are sharing the box. The crazy thing are companies that are shoving 500 customers on a box just because they can. When I had a Vserver account back in the day, what you paid for related to the number of accounts you shared the box with. So you didn't have a $25 a month account hogging the resources from a $150. In that case you only shared with ~8 accounts. So even in the VPS/VDS solution find out what you are getting and how they are setup. How much of a jail is there, and how much can you customize (Do you have Root?) or are you stuck with what you get.

One of the other large complaints is keeping up with Versions. I saw the complaint of one client wanting GD2 vs. GD1.6 running on different accounts, or a client complaining because a new version of PHP just came out and when are we going to make an update. Well if you create a jail environment that each account has root, then you eliminate that with the fact that a client can run their own versions to suit if they want 'bleeding edge' or just stable working versions.

If they introduced serverxchange today as a new product it would be light years behind H S P C O M P L E T E. Actually, what am I saying? It IS light years behind.

I disagree. Ensim is far superior in terms of fault toleration and isolation. However that is an opinion based off of what I like to see in VDSs right now.

Also, SX really has nothing to do with VDSs other then it is a delivery platform. No one said you have to use SX for anything else. I will agree H S P is a better overall platform then SX when you count billing, account management, etc...

H S P is a very capable package. You can move a VE to another machine, technically, moving the client to a server dedicated to them.

What about VMware virtual servers? That seems to be the choice for Dell and the big boys (and I'm not talking about Jason from mehost :) )

Yeah, Billy, virtual servers have been out awhile, but the technology and competition is getting better.

BTW, I recently went through around 500 google listings about virtual servers. Boring life, I know. :(

And spry... you are not allowed to advertise yourself in this thread.

Strange how you seem to be putting down virtual servers in your post, then you ended it by advertising yourself.

Thats really what I meant. **** is a more complete operations system than serverxchange. I'd be willing to bet if both vps systems were tested side by side that fault toleration and isolation would pretty close to even though. Maybe we'll have to try and do that when we get setup with ***.

Originally posted by m0nkeyhost
The crazy thing are companies that are shoving 500 customers on a box just because they can.

Don't go there with Bob...it doesn't matter how many accounts are on a server. :)

Gary

Good one, editor. :) :) :)

Seriously, I can't see hosts putting any more clients on a virtual server than they already do with shared hosting.

I'm just wondering if a host selling a $10 virtual server can stay in business.

On the other side of the spectrum, I've seen outrageous virtual server prices that are more money than a dedicated server and offer less. With the price of dedicated servers dropping, if I had to pay $50 or more for a virtual server, I'd just go with a dedicated.

My opinion is that in order to make virtual servers work in the mainstream hosting marketplace that they were have to be priced between $10-$30 per month... but I could be wrong.

I'm not putting down Virtual Servers. I think their great and meet the needs of a lot of people. I just also understand the problem with trying to have as many accounts on a server as possible.

It's like staying in Hotel. If I stay at hotel that I'm only paying $20/night then I'm probably not going to receive the greatest accomodations, might not have hot water if I shower at 9am. But if I go to a hilton and spend $100 a night, the accomodations reflect that and I don't worry about hot water.

Both have some of the same features, but how I receive those and the expectations are different.

So for 90%+ of the hosting world, a VPS meets their needs, it's just finding the right one for you and setting your expectations right.
**********
My original comment was on the discussion of having a Jailed environment with some shared resources vs. completely dividing all resources using the additional software out there.

I'd be willing to bet if both vps systems were tested side by side that fault toleration and isolation would pretty close to even though. Maybe we'll have to try and do that when we get setup with ***.

We did. You will see. :)

SX could take notes on the H S P system.

UBCI disagree. Ensim is far superior in terms of fault toleration and isolation. However that is an opinion based off of what I like to see in VDSs right now.Actually, both Ensim and H S P C use the exact same isolation technology. The actual scheduling core is open source and published on Sourceforge: http://fairsched.sourceforge.net/

m0nkeyhostNow in my mind I would rather use the jail method of FreeBSD with some modifications and share the resources.FreeBSD jails are limited in many areas. Without kernel modifications you cannot enable IPC's within jails safely, cannot hide the system wide file systems, and cannot have more than one IP address assigned to a single jail.

More m0nkeyhostMost resources are used in bursts anyway, the same as your bandwidth. So again, not every person is using the entire set of resources at any one time. If any does start to abuse resources, that's what Sys Admins are for, and there are plenty of alert tools to notify of problems server side and allow for regulation, or some other action.You can burst within H S P C VPS' and I am pretty certain Ensim allows this as well. It's more like 'curbs' in the sense that the limits are only enforced when resources are scarce.

I think, as Everyday mentioned, that if you were to put Ensim's and H S P C VPS' side by side they would run nearly the same.

Originally posted by chrisb
On the other side of the spectrum, I've seen outrageous virtual server prices that are more money than a dedicated server and offer less. With the price of dedicated servers dropping, if I had to pay $50 or more for a virtual server, I'd just go with a dedicated.


Not all people think that cheap dedicated servers fit their needs. Companies that offers ded servers at sub $50 (like UCG/FDC) will invite many sort of problems such as DOS, spammers, etc. UCG may be better now, but if you closely monitor them then their uptime is really under par. In fact, if I were to run a serious business I will still go with rackspace instead of FDC or UCG.

Some people will look for prices, some will look for reliability and quality. I still believe VPS for $50-$150 is still feasible. In fact, Verio's VPS starts at $150 if I am not wrong and they still get many customers for their VPS. There are companies that target low-end buyers, and there are companies that target high-end market. To say that one thing is not preferable compared to the other is rather short minded.

Actually, both Ensim and H S P C use the exact same isolation technology. The actual scheduling core is open source and published on Sourceforge: http://fairsched.sourceforge.net/

Well, basically, so are FreeBSD and Linux. It matters what you do with it. The guys at H S P are very good about letting you test there software. While I stated before, they are very similar, the subtle differences is what matters to me. Also, correct me if I am wrong, but Fairsched is only part of the isolation technology in place. That is for CPU.

Also, in simple terms, common sense would tell they are different in that one allows hundreds of instances and the other, very few. They are both excellent solutions. We are looking at bring in low(er) cost VDSs with H S P.

Also, in simple terms, common sense would tell they are different in that one allows hundreds of instances and the other, very few. They are both excellent solutions. We are looking at bring in low(er) cost VDSs with H S P.I hate to speculate so much and I really wish the folks at Ensim were a little more forthcoming on their technology, it's like they don't want to sell it or something. When I was trying to get details they insisted on selling me Webppliance so ultimately I gave up on them, opting to dig out what details I could from other sources.

Because of that, I may say things that are inaccurate regarding their technology and in doing so am only speaking what I believe to be true, and as mentioned in other instances I'm certainly capable of being wrong.

Here is what I believe is the case, since as you say Ensim allows only a few intances versus the H S P C allowing hundreds. I think the difference is due to the fact that H S P C allows overselling and Ensim does not. There is a certain logic that permits overselling to a degree, and the ease of moving a VPS from one host server to another within H S P C actually makes it an ideal environment for doing so.

UmBillyCord, if you have the knowledge or something that describes the Ensim technology and what locks and limits are in place, please post or PM me. I would *love* to be able to say "I know this is what happens" rather than "I think this is what happens." Ya know?

Missed this:Also, correct me if I am wrong, but Fairsched is only part of the isolation technology in place. That is for CPU.Yes, you are right, it does not cover a few things like memory allocation, IPC, the specialized file systems, virtual network adapters, etc. There is quite a bit more than just the fairsched, but I believe that is the root of it.

Like chrisb, I am also quite interested in what you guys think about using VMware as a VPS solution as I have have inquired about it in the Running a Web Hosting Biz forum: http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=86279

Thanks ;)

I think the difference is due to the fact that H S P C allows overselling and Ensim does not. There is a certain logic that permits overselling to a degree, and the ease of moving a VPS from one host server to another within H S P C actually makes it an ideal environment for doing so.

Yes, you are correct. You can not oversell with Ensim. Ensim will do this also server to server moves.

I too have noticed Ensim not so willing to talk about what they do while H S P is much more open.

As I stated before, I really hope Ensim release a "Lite" VDS version, similar to Sphera or H S P so their partners can sale smaller scale, QOS type accounts for the $25 - $50.00 price range.

Umbilly, I'd be curious about any testing you did between the two systems as well. I'm assuming you're using serverxchange since there's probably not a chance in hell ensim would let you demo it to test against a competitor.

The main difference I see is that H S P (I'll describe as best I can) basically gives each VE a copy of everything on the server, or whatever you want the VE to have. Where as ensim is more of a separate system with each VPS actually having space taken up with the os, apps, etc.

Really we are referring to these products incorrectly. H S P is the automation system, V I R T U O Z Z O is the technology that creates the VE's.

I was always told that ensim required you to have serverxchange to have their vps technology, I was not aware that there is a separate system on top of their VPS technology. Please correct me if I am wrong.

I think its kind of cool that you could just V I R T U and not have to get H S P. Although automation is king, which is why the built H S P.

The main difference I see is that H S P (I'll describe as best I can) basically gives each VE a copy of everything on the server, or whatever you want the VE to have. Where as ensim is more of a separate system with each VPS actually having space taken up with the os, apps, etc.

This is the best way I could describe it too. It is inbetween Spera and Ensim in my opinion. (Who knows, maybe Sphera changed their system. We haven't looked at it for a few years now). This is why I feel for VDSs, Ensim offer a better product. It is very difficult for someone to tell they are on a Ensim dedicated vs VDS. Run top in Ensim's VDS for example. I see people with Linux experience always on the Ensim forums asking if they got a VDS or dedicated. :)

Really we are referring to these products incorrectly. H S P is the automation system, V I R T U O Z Z O is the technology that creates the VE's.

LOL. Yeah, but one is easier to spell. :) . I think these guys even have another name for their standalone control panel software.

I was always told that ensim required you to have serverxchange to have their vps technology, I was not aware that there is a separate system on top of their VPS technology. Please correct me if I am wrong.

Although I heard rumors they will release a standalone product, I have never heard this from Ensim. SX is required to create first the physiacl server, then the VDSs on top of it.

I think its kind of cool that you could just V I R T U and not have to get H S P. Although automation is king, which is why the built H S P.

True. But like Ensim with SX found out. Many people want to develop their own automation at the upper end. Integrated billing, support, monitoring, etc.. then drop cheap CPs on actual servers. Things like CPs are a pain in the ass to update I feel. I would rather pay someone to deal with patches and fixes and new releases compatable with new OSs. However, at the upper automation levels where things truly are virtual, I want my own system. H S P Complete is by far the best I have seen. (I think it has ticketing now too?). But still, for someone like you dropping 4 CPs on servers for your customers, H S P doesn't help witht he long term. You need your own system to intigrate it all together.

H S P doesn't have a ticketing system yet, not sure if one is planned or not. I've yet to see a a really decent ticketing system out there other than the the likes of Remedy or Kana.

Regarding this:But still, for someone like you dropping 4 CPs on servers for your customers, H S P doesn't help witht he long term. You need your own system to intigrate it all together.I'm probably misinterpretting it, but with H S P you have the ability to create application templates and provide them to your end users as complimentory or for-pay with automated installation. Not sure if that is what you mean though.

The template system is what attracted me to H S P.

There is no ticket system in place and as I heard there are no plans for one. I guess they figured since there are so many out there that there's no for another. Which is true.

I'd still like to see a more in depth comparison. UmBilly can you help with that aspect? Feel free to email me info if you have it.

I would like to talk a bit about the infamous sw*soft technology.

We are quite a bit of piece of sw*soft, so we get too add in features, play with them, communication with us and sw*soft has been great, and best of all sw*soft partnership.

HS/Virtuozo 2.0 has many features which many like, though at the same time one with the most bugs. If you look at the latest changelog when we were the first to get Service Pack 1 to test:


==================================================
======================
Columns: Status, Bug #, Requested by, Assigned to, Description
==================================================
======================
UP 11726 jt shrike [eryxma]Hanging Apache in 2.0.1 [1.5]
UP 11711 olsh "Subscription has been created" event never oc [1.7]
UP 12110 jt shrike [eryxma] authorized relaying denied [1.7]
UP 10710 [eryxma]shrike e-mail is not accepted by default for a (12163)
UP 11716 kirill [eryxma]Can subscribe to plan using hostname already assigne
UP 12310 ale shrike [eryxma]customer cannot create VE using default domain [1.6]
UP 10761 bar shrike Strange timezones in /pcc...
UP 10783 ale kmv Problem with hosting plans that are not (12358)[1.7]
UP 12435 jt shrike [eryxma] primary DNS does not resolve, but second...
UP 11756 bar kirill Somehow subscription period was not updated after..
UP 11758 ale kmv Bug in VE balance
UP 11065 jt kirill SC orders additional space
UP 11223 bar kirill when plan is upgraded, customer is refunded in full
UP 12317 ale shrike [eryxma]Subscription period is not shown in the invoice.
UP 12785 ole kmv All plans are reseted after updating template.
UP 10463 ole kmv no invoice received for traffic overusage (metered)
UP 10464 ole shrike [eryxma]non-zero instant balance for traffic overusage
UP 11773 ale baza Cannot pay debit adjusment. [1.7]
UP 12498 ale kirill It`s possible to register as many domains as y [1.7]
UP 12940 tor shrike [eryxma]mn eats all vmpages in install!
UP 11207 tor shrike [eryxma]license for hn shows wrong expiration time
UP 11151 tor shrike [eryxma]template crontab (cron.hourly) contains heavy stat s
UP 10896 tor shrike [eryxma]shaping settings ignored for rate=0
UP 11289 tor shrike [eryxma]root password always shoudl be entered while u [1.4]
UP 11290 tor shrike [eryxma]root password always set to ve while any sync [1.4]
UP 11186 tor vap pcc - cp - mycp mess
UP 11162 jt nomad missing field in notification emails
UP 10964 tor shrike [eryxma]SLA shows o disk usage
UP 11256 tor shrike [eryxma]SLM traffic incorrect
UP 11326 tor shrike [eryxma]SLM traffic shows quite strange values
UP 11522 vap Force to create hostname broken [1.4]
UP 11253 bar kirill in case of metered resource maximum value is shown t
UP 11099 bar nomad Cannot assign hostname to IP address from CP
UP 11101 bar shrike [eryxma]address for hostname cannot be changed from /pcc
UP 11285 bar shrike [eryxma]aliases part of control panel->mailserver is broken
UP 10788 bar eaa nameservers synchronization via ssh is broken [1.6]
UP 12257 bar shrike server-side backup failures [1.7]
UP 11778 tor vap ip pool dns settings not working 20020906c [1.7]
UP 11061 jt shrike [eryxma]Offline payments are not applied automatically towar
UP 11676 jt shrike [eryxma]Popular customer request about domain manager
UP 12211 jt shrike [eryxma] Manitoba is invalid state
UP 12111 jt shrike [eryxma] customer gets more space and traffic than h
UP 12114 jt shrike [eryxma] user can create domains, starting with http
UP 12305 jt shrike [eryxma] Unable to edit list info
UP 12306 jt shrike [eryxma] Problems renaming the lsits
UP 12113 jt shrike [eryxma] spelling
UP 12212 jt shrike [eryxma] more spelling errors
UP 11762 ale olsh Hiding do not work for resellers with special..[1.4]
UP 12308 jt shrike [eryxma] restrict_post majordomo options does not wo
UP 12307 jt shrike [eryxma] majordomo logs messages
UP 12214 jt shrike [eryxma] problems with majordomo
UP 9481 jt shrike [eryxma]Renaming VE leads to Application Error
UP 11063 jt shrike [eryxma]webmin passwords
UP 11433 jt shrike Problem with File Manager in Control Panel (#12258)
UP 12472 vov shrike [eryxma]Task Manager "eats" return codes
UP 12487 ale olsh **** tools are NOT able to create users with d [1.7]
UP 12488 ale olsh **** tools are NOT able to create users with d [1.7]
UP 13142 jt shrike [eryxma] delete domain in domain manager
UP 11148 jt vap Reset authorization code for Douglas Boldt
UP 11188 ale shrike Backup for large VE
UP 12109 jt shrike [eryxma] client-side backup is limited to 5MB
UP 11790 ale shrike [eryxma]Very slow performance of E-mail server
UP 12213 jt shrike [eryxma] catch-all email address
UP 11793 ale oleg eNom plugin is not able to retrieve prices for domai
UP 11430 jt shrike [eryxma]There should be a way to edit MX'es from /cp
UP 11731 ale shrike [eryxma]Bug in reseller's hiding procedure
UP 11709 ale oleg Problem with site manager - html header
UP 10785 pavea ****-util.pl
UP 10550 shrike [eryxma]problems while account change
UP 10787 vap ****-utils.pl problem
UP 10956 vap node IP address should not appear in pool [1.7]
UP 10996 nomad after installation ****.log full of mesages:
UP 10758 jt vova Log rotation is not configured
UP 11150 jt shrike [eryxma]Trial IPs are not released when needed
UP 10519 jt vova There no SMTP after POP authorisation in OS-template
UP 11969 jt shrike [eryxma]File manager DOS->Unix conversion
UP 11980 oleg Localization for string 'Hosting Plans Comparison'
UP 12216 jt shrike [eryxma] bad formatting in majordomo

Many things fixed, though there are still more, and more features coming.

These are the ones we are working on, which should be available with 3.0, will be out sometime this month to us, but we need to test it before it goes out.

Ticket system Implementation
Onlinenic.com domain reg intergration
propay.com intergration

The one we are VERY VERY VERY picky on IPS!!!! If you want this, please make sure you get each server its own Class C ips, just make sure of that... its rediculus people saying here put 1000VEs in a server, hah!, I wish I can get that many class cs on a server alone, it would be impresive, I ended up buying a router to special route my new IPs so in case of another incidient Eryxma just had won't do much damage.

So what is coming is ability to create name based VEs, this will be out December.

This software is yet buggy, we have submitted this week alone, a bit over 150 bugs, and well what I like is the 12-72 hours resolution for the bugs, its great :), though this is only because of our small partnership, and with the huge client base we have put into this software, a bit over 1,500 clients. Though many don't like it, they think its too hard, though many love it.

This software though I think it isn't good for regular hosting, as I have noticed from experience, it is nowhere ready. But for something else I do believe so, but I am not allowed to say anything yet, as soon you all guys will see what I will be good, no no, but EXCELLENT for!

I'd still like to see a more in depth comparison. UmBilly can you help with that aspect? Feel free to email me info if you have it.

The biggest factor for us was the ability to run WP on the VDS. WP is much better then the CP H S P complete has.

I will say, overall, the V I R T U system has much more options and choices when dealing in the VDS environmnet. S W soft really pushes this too. They truly believe their virtualization is superior to Ensim. To be fair, we did not spend more then 2 -3 days on the V I R T U VEs. It is very difficult to truly get a great feel unless you really go live and see what the users are experiencing. What we tested was not enough to pull us off Ensim.

I would love to see what live users have to say who have used it for 6 - 12 months. Especially FreeBSD guys.

So what is coming is ability to create name based VEs, this will be out December.


Hmmm. That is odd. That is like saying you can have a Name-based dedicated server. Is it really a VDS if it is name based? This will be something to see.

So what is coming is ability to create name based VEs, this will be out December.The only way I could see this as even being possible is that VE's will get a dummy internal IP address (like 192.168.0.x) and then using Apache's NameVirtualHost directive along with it's proxy capabilities, serve up the web pages. Something similar would have to be done in regards to POP3 (by dissecting user@domain.com??).

This does nothing for any other services you provide (SSH, FTP, ...). I just don't think this is possible. Network transactions are done using IP addresses not names.

Originally posted by FHDave


Not all people think that cheap dedicated servers fit their needs. Companies that offers ded servers at sub $50 (like UCG/FDC) will invite many sort of problems such as DOS, spammers, etc. UCG may be better now, but if you closely monitor them then their uptime is really under par. In fact, if I were to run a serious business I will still go with rackspace instead of FDC or UCG.

Some people will look for prices, some will look for reliability and quality. I still believe VPS for $50-$150 is still feasible. In fact, Verio's VPS starts at $150 if I am not wrong and they still get many customers for their VPS. There are companies that target low-end buyers, and there are companies that target high-end market. To say that one thing is not preferable compared to the other is rather short minded.

I don't know what you're trying to say by that last sentence, but I wasn't saying that one was more preferable than the other. I agree some people look for price, others look for quality and reliability, and still others look for the best combination of price, quality, speed, and reliability. I fit in the last category, though I believe most customers look solely for cheap prices.

I don't think you can compare most hosts with Verio; but good luck to those who can sell VPS's at Verio's prices. On the other hand, how do we know how well Verio's virtual servers are selling?

Has anyone tried VMware and what did you think of it. Ensim and H S P Complete aren't the only players, ya know.

I'm also wondering which virtual servers are the most like a dedicated, such as: which allow root access?

And are all virtual servers managed, and come with a control panel?

Originally posted by HostInspect
I would like to talk a bit about the infamous sw*soft technology.
<BIG SNIP>
This software is yet buggy, we have submitted this week alone, a bit over 150 bugs, and well what I like is the 12-72 hours resolution for the bugs, its great :), though this is only because of our small partnership, and with the huge client base we have put into this software, a bit over 1,500 clients. Though many don't like it, they think its too hard, though many love it.

This software though I think it isn't good for regular hosting, as I have noticed from experience, it is nowhere ready. But for something else I do believe so, but I am not allowed to say anything yet, as soon you all guys will see what I will be good, no no, but EXCELLENT for!

Is this why Erxyma is not accepting any more customers... because of the bugs in H S P complete?

One thing I also want to know is, why is H S P Complete need to be spelt H S P? Why are those 3 letters banned around here??

Could someone explain this concept of overselling on VDS systems? You have said it is like a curb, where each virtual machine is allowed to burst (presumably to full or almost full use of the machine), unless the machine is busy. This doesn't make sense to me.

Let's say you have a 1Ghz machine and sold 20 accounts at 100Mhz each (so you are oversold). If more than 10 of these accounts want to use the cpu, you are screwed -- it is impossible to give them what you have guaranteed.

Is it instead like this?: You sell no more than 10 100Mhz accounts, but then you sell a bunch of "no guarantee" accounts, which get shoved out of the way when the guaranteed accounts want cpu?

Thanks,
Matt

Originally posted by Aussie Bob
One thing I also want to know is, why is H S P Complete need to be spelt H S P? Why are those 3 letters banned around here??

Because H S P spammed these forums.. And really, everyone that avoids the censor is breaking the rules :D

mattr0,

If you sell 20 100Mhz accounts on a 1Ghz machine, you've oversold it. You cannot guarantee the 100Mhz in each account but you are still able to sell it like this. The reason is simply that most of the time you will have little bursts of usage and very rarely will you have all 20 accounts looking for 100Mhz. If all accounts did require that much CPU at the same time, the system generates a warning and it's the System Administrators job to correct the situation by moving VE's to another less utilized server.

Basically, rather than wasting the clock cycles by committing them, H S P Complete allow you to oversell. Done in moderation and with care there should be no problems.

After reading 4 pages of people going on about Virtual Private Servers/Virtual Dedicated Servers, it makes me wonder why anyone would want a VPS/VDS solution when they can just go out and get their own machine for $100 bucks a month from RackShack/UnitedColo/Nocster?

At least with your own machine you have full control over your OS environment. v-i-r-t-u-o-z-z-o like many other VPS/VDS solutions run on a custom built kernel with proprietary software on top of that. This means that any new kernel releases need to be re-hacked and distributed--which can take from a few weeks to a few months. Not an ideal situation if a kernel is determined to be exploitable. They basically have you bent over the table.

In my opinion VPS/VDS solutions will not make a huge appearance in the web hosting industry. Like I said above, why pay $75/month when you can pay $100/month and have your own machine.

Because, for $100/mo you aren't likely to getting a server at InterNap, Verio, WorldCom, or one of the other tier-1 companies.(I'm not bashing on any smaller companies here, just making a point.)

Originally posted by JTY
Because, for $100/mo you aren't likely to getting a server at InterNap, Verio, WorldCom, or one of the other tier-1 companies.(I'm not bashing on any smaller companies here, just making a point.) What's wrong with RackShack or FastServers networks? Both companies operate on Tier1 bandwidth.

Originally posted by CipherVendor
In my opinion VPS/VDS solutions will not make a huge appearance in the web hosting industry. Like I said above, why pay $75/month when you can pay $100/month and have your own machine.
Yeah, but you get jack for $100/mth. Good dedicateds would start from the $250/mth + mark etc. Colo your own and get 2U space for about $100/mth and buy a server for $500.00.

Many options indeed. :)

A VPS doesn't have to cost $75. Not everyone wants the world for a penny, believe it or not there are people out there that actually know what they need.

Why spend $100 on an unmanaged server with a high setup fee, 400GB bandwidth and 40 GB disk when all you really need is 5GB bandwidth and 500 MB disk and you get decent support to boot? If the cost was $75 versus $100 then you are blowing $300 per year that you could use to buy your kid a new bike. Bring that price tag down to $50 and you save $600 per year. It's rather pointless and irresponsible to throw money away just when you don't have to. BTW, these prices are ficticious, I wouldn't really even think to charge $50 for a 500 MB 5 GB plan, likely closer to half that.

The bottom line is that VPS's make for very good middle grounds.

Originally posted by Aussie Bob

Yeah, but you get jack for $100/mth. Good dedicateds would start from the $250/mth + mark etc. Colo your own and get 2U space for about $100/mth and buy a server for $500.00.

Well for the extra $25/month and taking the $100/month machine you gain that much more control you don't get with a VPS/VDS. You aren't bent over the table waiting for updates from a company that could file for chapter 11 tomorrow.

Another aspect is that the $100/month dedicated machine and the $75/month VPS/VDS packages are somewhat of a grey area. The transition from a shared account to a dedicated machine doesn't require a middle step.

Should your site become too large for a shared hosting account, it certainly isn't going to fair well in a VPS/VDS jail. Scripts will start timing out because of a lack of resources, etc.

All in all like I mentioned before, VPS/VDS solutions will not be the next web hosting trend. The industry already offers sufficient solutions when it comes to resource intense web sites. More choice is just more confusion for the non-tech savvy consumer.

Originally posted by DizixCom
BTW, these prices are ficticious, I wouldn't really even think to charge $50 for a 500 MB 5 GB plan, likely closer to half that.


Offering a VPS/VDS solution for under $75 is ludicrous let alone $25/month.

With the amount of maintenance you have to do on each machine, let alone field support tickets from users. If you sit down and count your dimes at the end of the month you won't have any. There is no possible way to make money off a VDS/VPS plan that is under $75/month. Even off a shared hosting account that's $25/month, how much money is everyone really making? $3 dollars a month profit, maybe less?

I should take that back. If you have machines in a cogent facility on a 100 mbit - $1000/month connection with cheap Bonavio servers and support outsourced to India, yeah you _might_ be able to pull it off.

I look at it from a different way...

The $99 dedicated servers are great for someone who knows how to administor a dedicated box. The difference with a VE/VPS is that the person does not need to know how to administor anything, they never even have to go in as root if they don't want to.

They want might more reliablity than a shared hosting account can give them without the hassles of having a dedicated server that is unmanaged. Remember we are talking about unmanaged dedicated servers vs. fully managed VE/VPS here.

If you want to compare apples against apples, which I think would be good to do for anyone who might read this post later, compare a fully managed dedicated and a fully managed VE/VPS. Fully mananged dedicateds are over $300 a month and most of the time and can have pretty substantial setup fee's. Where as, if done right, a VE/VPS can be had for $50 a month with no setup fee.

So, I do agree that it is not the perfect solution for everyone. However, I do beleive that VE/VPS hosting will make shared hosting obsolete as the technology and hardware improve over the next few years.

You aren't bent over the table waiting for updates from a company that could file for chapter 11 tomorrow.

Actually, if you are using a control panel ie: ensim, plesk, cpanel, h sphere, etc. you are stuck with waiting on them to update kernels, issue patches, etc.

Originally posted by CipherVendor
In my opinion VPS/VDS solutions will not make a huge appearance in the web hosting industry. Like I said above, why pay $75/month when you can pay $100/month and have your own machine.


I believe someone alrdy mentioned this, but VPS have been around for a while now. Its not some new concept that we're seeing.

Depending who your going with it could mean alot. Alot of people agree that the price per month is a mix of service, hardware, bandwidth and uptime..

I pay 95/month for 600megs of space. In the past 3 1/2 years I've been offline a total of maybe 3-5 days (a very high estimate) worth, the longest continuous period of time offline was 30-45mins. From reading the posts here, I do not know very many hosting companies that can make that claim..

If I have a problem that I cannot resolve, I email support, or I can call support, there's also online live help via the sales which are very helpful and can get your support concerns to a tech.

No I do not have all the latest, greatest kernels or software loaded. But the systems are kept up to date with known stable software, and when new patches are released or serious bugs, they are corrected without my intervention.

If your looking for ALOT of hardware/space, low cost per month and bandwidth usage, then a dedicated server is the correct way to go, and everyday I think about switching to my own dedicated server to save ALOT of money, but in the back of my mind I know that i've been spoiled with a managed server, top notch support, no worries about how much bandwidth is being used (cpu processes are limited, i dont want to offend anyone and say i have unlimited bandwidth). And when I do something stupid and delete a clients entire home directory and website.. I'm only a few keystrokes from restoring the files.

Ohh yeah, and my ping to the server is 15-50ms averages 20ms. these are the reasons I pay almost double that of a dedicated server with someone like Rackshack (I have two VPSs)

PKspawn...

Originally posted by Everyday
I look at it from a different way...

The $99 dedicated servers are great for someone who knows how to administor a dedicated box. The difference with a VE/VPS is that the person does not need to know how to administor anything, they never even have to go in as root if they don't want to.

So you are under the assumption that all VPS/VDS environments come with a control panel? Just as an example the higher end VPS/VDS solutions ( v-i-r-t-u-o-z-z-o, vmware, connectix) do not come with control panels. So on top of having to fork out the cash to license a server with a top dogs software to run virtual environments, now you have to tell your non-technical client to go out and spend another x number of dollars a month on a control panel.

Of course, that's provided that say a control panel like cpanel will install and run correctly on these proprietary virtual environments.

Originally posted by CipherVendor


Offering a VPS/VDS solution for under $75 is ludicrous let alone $25/month.Apparently we've done our research in different ways. Don't assume that because you cannot make the numbers work to your liking that it cannot be done.

Also consider the size of the VPS that I outlined, not exactly big. You could very easily and safely run 50 of these on any decent modern server. Your job as a system administrator is to make sure the resources are available and to balance the loads.

I don't think you've done your research.

Originally posted by CipherVendor
So you are under the assumption that all VPS/VDS environments come with a control panel?I don't think anyone made that assumption.Just as an example the higher end VPS/VDS solutions ( v-i-r-t-u-o-z-z-o, vmware, connectix) do not come with control panels.That's fine, those implementations would run just as a smaller dedicated server with no control panel installed, a lot of people prefer this.So on top of having to fork out the cash to license a server with a top dogs software to run virtual environments, now you have to tell your non-technical client to go out and spend another x number of dollars a month on a control panel.So don't sell that environment to non-technical people, that's easy enough. It's a simple rule: Don't do that.Of course, that's provided that say a control panel like cpanel will install and run correctly on these proprietary virtual environments.I don't know about CPanel or Ensim, but I do know for a fact that Plesk and HSPHERE run just fine in V-i-r-t-u-o-z-z-o. If that's what you want. The H S P C offering actually does come with a fairly decent control panel that allows you to manage most things quite easily. If you want more control, you have it. H S P C is the management tool for V-i-r-t-u-o-z-z-o. You can also install Webmin / Usermin if you'd like. The options are virtually the same as they are with any dedicated server.

Hi guys.

Originally posted by DizixCom

This does nothing for any other services you provide (SSH, FTP, ...). I just don't think this is possible. Network transactions are done using IP addresses not names.

I have heard that name based VE is V I R T U kernel feature. And you can provide SSH, FTP services.
Cool if this is true. :)

HostInspect
If you have any information about this feature could you share it with us?

Originally posted by DizixCom
UBCActually, both Ensim and H S P C use the exact same isolation technology. The actual scheduling core is open source and published on Sourceforge: http://fairsched.sourceforge.net/

I'm disagree
Resource management process uses a 10% of CPU time in Ensim vs 1% in H S P C.

goodW, you are right. I think UBC pretty much proved me to be wrong in the sense that Ensim is actively agressive in it's resource management (pre-allocates resources and assigns them to the VPS) whereas H S P C (V irtuo zzo) is more passive.

Actually, if you are using a control panel ie: ensim, plesk, cpanel, h sphere, etc. you are stuck with waiting on them to update kernels, issue patches, etc.

So you are under the assumption that all VPS/VDS environments come with a control panel?

What I said was IF you are using a control panel you would still be hooked to a company waiting for their updates, referencing this...

At least with your own machine you have full control over your OS environment. v-i-r-t-u-o-z-z-o like many other VPS/VDS solutions run on a custom built kernel with proprietary software on top of that. This means that any new kernel releases need to be re-hacked and distributed--which can take from a few weeks to a few months. Not an ideal situation if a kernel is determined to be exploitable. They basically have you bent over the table.

I have tested plesk, cpanel and ensim under a VE and know that they work just fine. There are two products here, H S P C and V-I-R-T-U-O-Z-Z-O. You do not need H S P C unless you want to automate the V-I-R system.

The point here is that the technology is much better than shared hosting. If you only put 200 to 300 shared sites on one server as most everyone here claims they do then you could easily run 200 to 300 VE's as well.

How come everyone is always attacking someone on this board? I realize some people may have different opinions than others but why bash someone for having a nice conversation about a technology? It is Web Hosting TALK after all :)

Resource management process uses a 10% of CPU time in Ensim vs 1% in H S P C.

We have Physical servers using 5% with Ensim.

Ensim is actively agressive in it's resource management (pre-allocates resources and assigns them to the VPS) whereas H S P C (V irtuo zzo) is more passive.

This is why you can only put 20 or so VDS on an Ensim physical server. They will tell you that it is more, but we have a hard time believing that. For this reason, it is hard to sell Ensim VDSs for under lets say $60.

With Virtu...., you can do things like create 100 small VDSs and upsell your larger hosting plans to $25 - $40 (random numbers) and add a QOS guarantee, something the current $20 - $40 shared site guys can not do.

I don't think you've done your research.

:) I agree.

Those are the exact reasons I like H S P C over ensim. It can be used into more as more of a shared hosting system and can be made more affordable than ensims system.

Ensim is still a nice system just not for me. :)

Originally posted by chrisb


Is this why Erxyma is not accepting any more customers... because of the bugs in H S P complete?

No.

We initiated a migration sequence from Chicago to Atlanta globalcompass datacenter.

Its complete now, *** handled it well, we just need time to get ready for reopening. Some new things changing... and new offerings, with policy changes.

Thank you

Have you guys ever had experience with runing VPS with UML (User Mode Linux)? Their homepage is http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net and although it might not be as easy to setup and what not, it's FREE! :D

I think this will definitely help fix the pricing problem you guys seem to be arguing about.

The idea of a free VPS system is interesting although I wouldn't like to put it into production use. It would be cool to download and play with on a home based red hat machine though, think of all the stuff you could run from one machine!!!

The costs to get started and be able to offer VPS accounts is not cheap, at least not compared to other hosting options now a days. I would like to think that people would begin to understand that you are very commited to your business model when you are investing well over $20,000 to offer VE/VPS hosting with full automation.:)

I don't think you can provide a TRUE VPS solution with UML because I've read a lot of material on their website and nothing hints to being able to control CPU usage. :(

Originally posted by UmBillyCord
I just read Allan's article in Hostingtech about VDSs. No offense to Allan or Dave, but why is this article written like this is some new idea or technology. I felt it was like someone discovered a rock that someone else left behind on there way to something new. VDSs have been out for a long time and the ideas behind them haven't changed other then maybe a lower cost of entry.


Its written that way because there are many hosts, outside of WHT, who have never heard of them and had no idea what purpose they serve, or market niche they fill (based on some of the e-mail I got in response, I think I was right on :)).

Of course VPS has been around forever, however you have to admit their popularity has increased significantly over the last year or so (okay, well, you don't have to admit it, but I am pretty sure it is true).


PS - Allan, are you getting kickbacks from Rackshack? :)


Robert promised me that every time I mention Rackshack he will say, "we are growing by more than 1,000 servers a month" one less time :D.

hey.. I want to revive this thread because it's very interesting.

I have looked into virtuozzo, ensim, and vmware and I can't see a way to make a good profit off them without adding another $12.50/mo to the cost of the VPS.

What sort of demand have people been seeing for the VPS's?

I'm working on a VPS system right now based off freebsd jails but with many patches to make it have much better separation between jail processes. I think it will solve many of the problems previously associated with freebsd vps's.

I *really* find I disagree with some people in this thread on what makes a "true" vps. I don't necessarily believe a "true" vps is one in which users resources are limited in any way. I think a better way of doing it would be scheduling instead of hard limits.

Any thoughts from you?

Originally posted by UmBillyCord
Umm... not likely at those prices. Sphera has a similar appraoch with multiple VDSs, but they too are not priced well enough to compete in a shared world right now. Remember, advertising VDSs at $20/mo doesn't mean anything to a person wanting to pay $10.00/mo for 'hosting'. Until the hosting customers are educated to understand the value of VDS, they are not going to part with extra dollars when shared hosting is just fine for 99% of the world.

On a side note, I would love to see Ensim release a lower end product like Sphera that allows more VDSs/server.

You might look at Sphera a little closer. They have new pricing out that allows mere mortals to purchase the whole suite for 999.00 or 1499.00 depending on whether you want integrated billing or not. If you sold 100 VDS's for 10.00 / month for 1 year you would easily make 11,000 (less bw and server costs) . Our customers love the technology and we do not limit the types of Value Apps that they can get. I'm not sure why web hosts are only concerned about "How many customers they can shove on a box". There is plenty of maney to be made from the technology. That extra time that we save by use in Hosting Automation software ought to be spent providing a better customer experience. (Sorry for the rant ;-) )

Sphera is limited to Linux if I'm not mistaken. Not to start a holy war over OS's but I have severe doubts about linux's security from a methodology standpoint.

Linux lacks a standardized code review process in all but the "core" of the OS. This compounded by the great number of distributions means that many hackers are the only ones providing any type of source code auditing / vulnerability assessment.

This being the case I cannot see running linux as an operating system for any server that acts as a host for many virtual private servers. In my professional opinion it would be like asking for trouble.

It isn't that I think linux is bad, I just feel it's immature. That said, I'll stick to FreeBSD thankyou.

As for the "stuffing users onto one server".. I'm actually working on a really neat piece of software to enable me to distribute the load of VPS's on the fly by moving them from one server to another. This will have several benefits such as allowing cpu hogs to be moved to other servers on the fly where they will not adversely affect the rest of the vps's on the systems.
This should allow more efficient usage of the server resources.

Kevin Lynn, CISSP

Personally I would just recommend getting your own dedicated server if your even going to bother going that route, because regardless what you call it, its still a shared resource.:)

At least your not proposing Windows as a hosting platform. :stickout: Sphera already has the MoveVDS functionality. Its pretty sweet. I have always liked FreeBSD but when it came right down to doing business I've always had better luck with RH, It was just a choice. It does bother me to no end why RH hasn't adopted the Ports philosopy when it comes to compiling software. I've been dependencied to death lately. I think Sphera supported FreeBSD at on time, look for it again if RH decides to withdraw support for the "Free" version.

Originally posted by EBOZZ
Personally I would just recommend getting your own dedicated server if your even going to bother going that route, because regardless what you call it, its still a shared resource.:)
Sure its shared but the philosophy is that 90% of the folks out there do not need their own server, but a good portion of them want more control and more of a server like environment. With a VDS environment if a particular VDS account is killing the server then they are a great candidate for their own server. When it comes time to move them off of the Shared server it takes 1 click and about 5 minutes to migrate their entire site including DNS and IP address instead of 5 hours and a million headaches.

After you have run enough .com's you come to the realization that most businesses simply have no need for their own dedicated server.

The majority of companies never use even 10% of the resources available to their webservers. If .com's of the 90's had been smarter and realized this sooner they could have spent their money where it counted instead of on huge server farms and inflated colocation bills.

Who knows.. maybe some of them would still be around today..

I've seen Sphera server up over 400 VDS accounts on moderate hardware with 2 GB of RAM and still the load average is below 1. I thinks that soret of proves your point. I think security and flexibility are the #1 reasons to have your own box.

Hello guys,


What about the coming H-Sphere's Virtual Private Servers solution (http://www.psoft.net/promo/vps.html) : (currently in 3rd beta H-Sphere 2.3.1 Beta 3) which is based on the open source vps solution:

http://www.solucorp.qc.ca/miscprj/s_context.hc ???

What do you think about it? How do you compare it with Virtuzzo, User Mode Linux, and others?

rgrds :),

Zaki