Results 1 to 25 of 45
-
10-05-2009, 11:30 PM #1Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- May 2008
- Posts
- 442
Why don't all shared web hosts use litepspeed?
Why don't all shared web hosts use litepspeed? Any reason?
-
10-05-2009, 11:30 PM #2Grand Nagus
- Join Date
- Dec 2002
- Location
- Ferenginar
- Posts
- 4,157
I'm sure that this has something to do with it
https://store.litespeedtech.com/store/cart.phpWhat's your budget?
Seriously, what's your budget?
-
10-05-2009, 11:36 PM #3Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- May 2008
- Posts
- 442
-
10-05-2009, 11:38 PM #4Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Location
- NYC / Memphis, TN
- Posts
- 1,454
It's all preference. Most of us prefer to choose to stay out of another HyperVM situation with closed-source. Additionally, Apache 2.2 (if configured correctly) is just as good or better than Apache.
≈ PeakVPN.Com | Complete Privacy VPN | Cloud Hosting | Guaranteed Security | 1Gbps-10Gbps Unmetered
≈ PeakVPN | 31 VPN Servers | 17-Years Experience | Emergency 24/7 Support
≈ Visit us @ PeakVPN.Com (Coming SOON) | ASN: 3915
-
10-05-2009, 11:48 PM #5Retired Moderator
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- San Francisco
- Posts
- 7,325
-
10-06-2009, 12:18 AM #6Location = SoapBox
- Join Date
- Oct 2003
- Posts
- 6,564
I guess for the same reason they use Joomla for their website rather then a commercial product? "because open source matters"?
In all seriousness though - Apache v2.x is awesome and be configured pretty much however you like. Apache is rarely the limiting factor in shared hosting, so, changing to litespeed doesnt make much sense.. as Orien also pointed out, a large fleet is all about standardization. You cannot just plop a new webserver onto 100s of servers - it would cause all sorts of issues. Is litespeed better? in some aspects yes - it is, in others, no it isnt... I do not see a reason for litespeed to be a defacto standard.. though, I do see a niche market for it, thats for sure..www.cartika.com
www.clusterlogics.com - You simply cannot run a hosting company without this software. Backups, Disaster Recovery, Big Data, Virtualization. 20 years of building software that solves your problems
-
10-06-2009, 12:24 AM #7Web Hosting Industry Expert
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
- Location
- Indiana, USA
- Posts
- 19,196
It depends on the company.
Apache 2.2 can perform just as well as LiteSpeed but in my experiences it requires 2x the ram to do so (we've run Apache for years and LiteSpeed for long enough to identify the difference).
I wrote a small post about it on my personal non-commercial blog: http://www.mikedvb.com/2009/07/22/li...-2-in-my-eyes/█ Michael Denney - MDDHosting.com - Proudly hosting more than 37,700 websites since 2007.
█ Ultra-Fast Cloud Shared and Pay-By-Use Reseller Hosting Powered by LiteSpeed!
█ cPanel Free SSL 100% Uptime SLA 24/7 Support
█ Class-leading support that responds in minutes, not days.
-
10-06-2009, 01:53 AM #8Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Location
- NYC / Memphis, TN
- Posts
- 1,454
Just a correction... I meant "Apache 2.2 (if configured correctly) is just as good or better than Litespeed."
Our real world benchmarks prove Apache 2.2 is on par and in cases faster than Litespeed. Not to mention the flexibility we have with Apache and the limitless modules available. It's a safer bet for shared providers. Support is always here, whereas, Litespeed goes out of business and now all of your customers are completely unsupported. You can't fix bugs, you can't see the code, and you can't recognize the vulnerabilities. The risks far outweigh the benefits.
May never happen but in this business there is always that possibility.≈ PeakVPN.Com | Complete Privacy VPN | Cloud Hosting | Guaranteed Security | 1Gbps-10Gbps Unmetered
≈ PeakVPN | 31 VPN Servers | 17-Years Experience | Emergency 24/7 Support
≈ Visit us @ PeakVPN.Com (Coming SOON) | ASN: 3915
-
10-06-2009, 02:46 AM #9Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
- Location
- Seminole, Oklahoma
- Posts
- 1,665
-
10-06-2009, 02:58 AM #10Disabled
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
- Posts
- 3,597
I suppose the main reason is demand. If there is demand for the services I'm sure that will be offered by every second host...
-
10-06-2009, 09:12 AM #11Support Facility
- Join Date
- Jun 2009
- Posts
- 2,335
As Apache is easy to use and there are heaps of information out for it, and its widely used and so bugs are quicker to found and solved quicker. As most of the webhosts install Cpanel, Plesk and directadmin which mostly rely on the Apache.
-
10-06-2009, 09:34 AM #12Newbie
- Join Date
- Sep 2009
- Location
- Belgium
- Posts
- 13
There are hundreds of webservers available. Why would we use LiteSpeed?
The fact that probably every sysadmin has worked with Apache gives it a big advantage.
-
10-06-2009, 11:15 AM #13Backup Guru
- Join Date
- Feb 2002
- Location
- New York, NY
- Posts
- 4,618
Apache is a proven web server. I haven't seen any cases where using anything else really makes that much of a difference. We've had customers pushing 500+ small files per second on Apache with a low load, so why switch?
Scott Burns, President
BQ Internet Corporation
Remote Rsync and FTP backup solutions
*** http://www.bqbackup.com/ ***
-
10-06-2009, 12:45 PM #14Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Mar 2002
- Location
- SFO,MIA,ATL,AMS
- Posts
- 650
the cost has to be absorbed somewhere, clients sure dont want to pay for it.
-
10-06-2009, 01:21 PM #15Temporarily Suspended
- Join Date
- Jul 2005
- Location
- Maine, US
- Posts
- 521
I have to agree with everything said here. However we have upgraded our server to apache 2.x and it is nice yet it create a world of headaches for my self and my techs. Working well into the night to fix many messed up sites, but I guess thats what you have to expect when upgrading to a major version improvement.
-
10-06-2009, 01:29 PM #16Web Hosting Industry Expert
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
- Location
- Indiana, USA
- Posts
- 19,196
Any host running Apache is going to fight for Apache where as any host running LiteSpeed is going to fight for LiteSpeed - that's like asking Host A if you should sign up with Host B and vice versa... The host wouldn't be running it if they didn't believe it could perform and do what they want it to do
In the end, this probably isn't the best place to ask this kind of question for an unbiased and objective response█ Michael Denney - MDDHosting.com - Proudly hosting more than 37,700 websites since 2007.
█ Ultra-Fast Cloud Shared and Pay-By-Use Reseller Hosting Powered by LiteSpeed!
█ cPanel Free SSL 100% Uptime SLA 24/7 Support
█ Class-leading support that responds in minutes, not days.
-
10-06-2009, 01:32 PM #17Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
- Location
- Seminole, Oklahoma
- Posts
- 1,665
Considering Apache is a Open source web server it has the worlds support behind it. When 1 bugs pops up and another person solves it. Then apache patches it and its all done. With Paid webservers you get a bug and their developers have to solve it and patch it.
Plus apache makes it cheaper for their clients
-
10-06-2009, 01:33 PM #18Web Hosting Industry Expert
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
- Location
- Indiana, USA
- Posts
- 19,196
Which in my experiences with LiteSpeed usually only takes a few minutes to an hour or two from the time that you report a bug until it's resolved and pushed into the latest build - I don't know that I've seen an update pushed out that fast with Apache so your argument doesn't make a whole lot of sense
Of course I am seeing things from the "other side of the fence" but I speak having run Apache 1.3, 2.0. and 2.2 for years prior to running LiteSpeed so I do have knowledge of both systems█ Michael Denney - MDDHosting.com - Proudly hosting more than 37,700 websites since 2007.
█ Ultra-Fast Cloud Shared and Pay-By-Use Reseller Hosting Powered by LiteSpeed!
█ cPanel Free SSL 100% Uptime SLA 24/7 Support
█ Class-leading support that responds in minutes, not days.
-
10-06-2009, 01:36 PM #19Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jul 2008
- Location
- Seminole, Oklahoma
- Posts
- 1,665
Well I am not saying lightspeed is slow. If they have fast service then perhaps they get to work and get the patch out. But I've never used lightspeed. I personally just hate trying to get support from paid services just because they can make you wait forever. But opensource you can ask the world for support and it is more easily answered. But as I said before I have never used lightspeed and probably never will. So who knows the true capability.
-
10-06-2009, 01:40 PM #20Retired Moderator
- Join Date
- Oct 2002
- Location
- EU - east side
- Posts
- 21,920
In the end, this probably isn't the best place to ask this kind of question for an unbiased and objective response
However we have upgraded our server to apache 2.x and it is nice yet it create a world of headaches for my self and my techs. Working well into the night to fix many messed up sites, but I guess thats what you have to expect when upgrading to a major version improvement.
-
10-06-2009, 01:42 PM #21Web Hosting Industry Expert
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
- Location
- Indiana, USA
- Posts
- 19,196
It certainly has it's place - as an example a server at another provider that I do some work for was running 200~300 loads (around 550 proxy accounts on the server) with Apache and FastCGI and as soon as it was switched to LiteSpeed the load dropped to 2~3 steady - RAM usage was cut in half and performance was greatly increased. I am very good at optimizing Apache and I have worked with it for years however the Proxy environment and the demands it put on Apache were too much for Apache to handle even heavily optimized on a *very strong* dual quad core node with HT raid10 and 24gb of ram A switch to LiteSpeed turned that all around and I could post up a video showing the huge differences but I'd rather Apache hosts stay on Apache which gives us LiteSpeed hosts more of an "Edge" and a smaller/tighter market
Edit: That server with 550 accounts was consolidated down from 4 such similar servers to save costs and then was switched to LiteSpeed to allow the 1 server to handle the work that previously required 4 servers... For the price of around $32/month the provider cut out over $1500 worth of additional leased servers I did try to optimize Apache before switching to LSWS however the requests/second and the amount of connections was simply too high for Apache to handle reliably
I do, I've been running LiteSpeed for some time and as stated in my response to the first section of your post I quoted, I've seen it work wonders. It's not a miracle piece of software that will solve every problem and I won't say that it does everything better than Apache but I have used their support enough to know that when a bug or issue is reported it's fixed quickly and that it can and does handle as much as Apache 2.2 (heavily optimized) or more using 1/2 as much ram or less.Last edited by Mike - MDDHosting; 10-06-2009 at 01:46 PM.
█ Michael Denney - MDDHosting.com - Proudly hosting more than 37,700 websites since 2007.
█ Ultra-Fast Cloud Shared and Pay-By-Use Reseller Hosting Powered by LiteSpeed!
█ cPanel Free SSL 100% Uptime SLA 24/7 Support
█ Class-leading support that responds in minutes, not days.
-
10-06-2009, 03:24 PM #22CISSP-ISSMP, CISA
- Join Date
- Aug 2002
- Location
- Seattle
- Posts
- 5,525
-
10-06-2009, 03:38 PM #23Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Location
- NYC / Memphis, TN
- Posts
- 1,454
≈ PeakVPN.Com | Complete Privacy VPN | Cloud Hosting | Guaranteed Security | 1Gbps-10Gbps Unmetered
≈ PeakVPN | 31 VPN Servers | 17-Years Experience | Emergency 24/7 Support
≈ Visit us @ PeakVPN.Com (Coming SOON) | ASN: 3915
-
10-06-2009, 04:16 PM #24Web Hosting Industry Expert
- Join Date
- Dec 2007
- Location
- Indiana, USA
- Posts
- 19,196
█ Michael Denney - MDDHosting.com - Proudly hosting more than 37,700 websites since 2007.
█ Ultra-Fast Cloud Shared and Pay-By-Use Reseller Hosting Powered by LiteSpeed!
█ cPanel Free SSL 100% Uptime SLA 24/7 Support
█ Class-leading support that responds in minutes, not days.
-
10-06-2009, 11:29 PM #25Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2006
- Location
- NYC / Memphis, TN
- Posts
- 1,454
≈ PeakVPN.Com | Complete Privacy VPN | Cloud Hosting | Guaranteed Security | 1Gbps-10Gbps Unmetered
≈ PeakVPN | 31 VPN Servers | 17-Years Experience | Emergency 24/7 Support
≈ Visit us @ PeakVPN.Com (Coming SOON) | ASN: 3915
Similar Threads
-
%35 OFF Shared Hosting! $8.99 a year shared hosting! Fusion-Hosts.com
By romes in forum Shared Hosting OffersReplies: 0Last Post: 03-17-2009, 03:48 PM -
Tricks of shared hosts,how to be a shared hoster.
By Libertes in forum Web HostingReplies: 8Last Post: 01-02-2008, 04:46 PM -
shared-hosts.com
By Annex in forum Domain Name OffersReplies: 0Last Post: 09-15-2007, 11:51 AM -
Shared hosts in NY/NJ
By Cavalier in forum Web HostingReplies: 4Last Post: 09-07-2005, 09:29 PM