Results 1 to 14 of 14
-
06-02-2011, 01:38 PM #1New Member
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
- Posts
- 1
VPS.net - A lot of Recent Downtime
I have been with VPS.net for half a year. I have had to put in a number of support tickets throughout the time I have been with them. The last 2 weeks though have been a nightmare. My server has gone down 4 times, and each time it has stayed down for hours and hours. I have a number of customer accounts, needless to say they are furious (at me!) I will be surprised if I keep their business much longer! Last night saw my most recent outage, as a result just this morning I was notified that I would be moved to the "new" SAN. My server is on the Atlanta D zone.
I cannot have another outage, especially in the next few weeks. I am wondering if I should bite the bullet and change providers. Can I trust this "new" SAN will make a difference? The stakes are high for me. Does any one have other recommendations. I am need CentOS with Cpanel/WHM.
Thanks,
-
06-02-2011, 01:58 PM #2WHT Addict
- Join Date
- Aug 2010
- Location
- Indiana
- Posts
- 151
I would suggest reading reviews on WHT and making your own decision from there. I have read a lot of threads about outages so you are not alone. But granted they run a pretty huge infrastructure and as the old saying goes, happy clients are likely not to post reviews and angry clients are more than likely to.
Any reason why your applications require a cloud? Why not try out a VPS?Brian Oliver - COO
XFuse Solutions, LLC
Fusing Superior Support with Superior Web Solutions
http://www.xfusesolutions.com
-
06-02-2011, 02:03 PM #3Junior Guru Wannabe
- Join Date
- Apr 2011
- Posts
- 32
I would go with another provider before your reputation turns into a bad one. Try LeaseWeb, Their rather good when it comes to VPS's.
-
06-02-2011, 03:07 PM #4Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- May 2011
- Location
- Chicago, IL
- Posts
- 730
VPS.net have been growing very rapidly, unfortunately a natural side effect is slow ticket responses until they can balance out again with staff vs. customers. Generally or cost reasons most businesses get the customers prior to the additional staff.
In your situation though it doesn't seem like you can afford to wait for that to happen, as the above posts have mentioned I might consider looking for other providers at least until VPS.net can stabilize again. They've had some great reviews in the past, I don't have any personal experience with them but I can't help but think they have something good going on.
Stray away at least for a bit, don't lose that reputation of yours!█ BigScoots.com - 98% of Clients Stay With Us Forever
█ Offering Fully Managed Shared & Reseller Hosting
█ Specializing in Managed WordPress, VPS & Dedicated Hosting
█ Opened 2010 & 100% Positively Reviewed Since | 100% Network Uptime
-
06-02-2011, 03:18 PM #5Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Apr 2006
- Location
- Rotherham, UK
- Posts
- 1,547
Cut your losses
IT & Hosting Solutions Rotherham - Virtual6 Ltd
IT Distributor | IT Manufacturer | Hosted Products | Business IT Support
-
06-02-2011, 03:23 PM #6WHT Addict
- Join Date
- May 2010
- Posts
- 118
ther requirements you are asking for should be very easy for any host to fill.
www.Hostd8.com "Where the client comes first!"
Ultra Fast Unmetered Dedicated Servers
Ultra Fast VPS's
Budget Line Shared Hosting
-
06-02-2011, 03:36 PM #7Web Hosting Guru
- Join Date
- Jan 2006
- Location
- Toronto, Canada
- Posts
- 265
I must say, I sent a ticket in today and had a reply in 3 minutes and a resolution in 15. My cloud server in Atlanta has had 100% uptime since I purchased it two months ago
-
06-02-2011, 03:52 PM #8Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Oct 2001
- Location
- Ohio
- Posts
- 8,535
Sorry - we're having some trouble with a legacy SAN unit that is experiencing some problems. It's performance is poor, at best, but unfortunately due to some software on it we're not really able to diagnose and troubleshoot the issues. We had plans to migrate everyone from this SAN already, but the problems experienced this week have caused us to move them up. Once moved to the new SANs you'll see a dramatic improvement in speed and reliability. Please feel free to contact me at terry(at)vps.net and we'd be happy to compensate you for the problems experienced.
-
06-02-2011, 05:09 PM #9Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Jun 2002
- Location
- PA, USA
- Posts
- 5,143
The issue is with VPS.net, and not cloud in general. At least, nothing wrong with our cloud. It is as mature, and even more redundant, than our VPS nodes.
We also have the same exact SAN issue when we tried them. It seems the SAN issue was not only limited to SLC-F ...Fluid Hosting, LLC - Enterprise Cloud Infrastructure: Cloud Shared and Reseller, Cloud VPS, and Cloud Hybrid Server
-
06-02-2011, 07:55 PM #10Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Oct 2001
- Location
- Ohio
- Posts
- 8,535
-
06-03-2011, 02:19 AM #11Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- May 2004
- Location
- /bin/sh
- Posts
- 815
-
06-03-2011, 02:31 AM #12Web Hosting Master
- Join Date
- Oct 2001
- Location
- Ohio
- Posts
- 8,535
-
06-03-2011, 09:22 AM #13
Glad to hear you've got this worked out for your new SAN
For what it's worth, this is why I cringe when I hear the words "cloud" or "SAN". The two thoughts that immediately run through my mind are "expensive", and "unreliable", with "over-hyped" being a third thought that's not far behind.
Storing data on attached hard disks is a mature technology, inexpensive, fast, and reliable. Storing data on SANs, pretty much the opposite. New technology, very expensive compared to the alternative, with many points of failure. You can engineer out a large number of these points of failure, so they're at least not single-points-of-failure, but there's still a lot more that can go wrong in a SAN than with attached storage.
People really need to ask themselves, what is more likely? A cpu node failing outright, and them needing to migrate their data and workload to another node, or a SAN failing or misbehaving, and absolutely everyone on that SAN having performance issues. I've certainly heard of more stories of the latter more than the former.
If a CPU node fails in a typical VPS setup, you can replace the motherboard, cpu, ram, power supply, or *whatever* was failing, and move on with your life. Even an array rebuild is not quite as big of a deal, because it only affects the data of a single set of customers using that one node. On a "cloud" setup, any number of things can go wrong which would take down many of your nodes at the same time: a network failure between the nodes and the SAN (either a soft failure, like some performance issue, or a hard failure, such as a faulty nic, cable, switch, or router), a software issue on the SAN (it's hard to build SAN software that's reliable, which is why the big boys charge so much for their SANs), an unexpected performance ceiling on the SAN (a common thing, and much more difficult to work around than a performance ceiling on a local storage node), or an outright SAN storage node failure (at least as likely as a VPS node failure, since both are just regular servers typically). So to eliminate some of these points of failure, you build a redundant SAN: two SAN servers, two redundant arrays storing all of your data, two SAN networks if possible. If you're thinking this sounds expensive, you're right.
And what do you actually get for all of this? Well, reduced performance for one. It's not easy pushing a huge amount of storage data over tcp/ip. Secondly, increased cost, which should be obvious. And third, reduced reliability. The only positive is that you can move a VPS from one VPS node to another quite easily in order to work around any CPU or RAM bottlenecks, which makes it easier to scale the CPU and RAM on a given VPS up or down on demand. In reality, it would generally be cheaper to just under-sell a typical VPS node, leaving some CPU and RAM free in the first place to allow people to upgrade as needed. This isn't quite as flexible as cloud, but will generally give customers what they need.
Oh, the biggest benefit to cloud and SAN storage is that you can call your offering a cloud. Almost forgot about that one.IOFLOOD.com -- We Love Servers
Phoenix, AZ Dedicated Servers in under an hour
★ Ryzen 9: 7950x3D ★ Dual E5-2680v4 Xeon ★
Contact Us: sales@ioflood.com ★
-
07-10-2011, 02:45 AM #14Aspiring Evangelist
- Join Date
- Jul 2006
- Location
- Lake Zurich, IL
- Posts
- 436
I'm a little late to respond, but I think the buzz about failing SANs is a tad over-exaggerated. I agree there have been vendors of SANs that have had firmware issues while the units are under high load (something that virtualization and large capacity disks has made more common), but I wouldn't say it's so widespread that every SAN should be considered unreliable and expensive. There are definitely very reliable, high-performance, and scalable SANs out there.
There are numerous advantages to centralized storage, which is the reason many companies have opted for SANs over local storage. Centralized resource management is the primary benefit along with very unbalanced LUN size and performance delivery for not only physical machines but virtual machines which could be located in varying locations of the data center.
There are places for local storage as well, but it is typically used for specific applications that don't require the space efficiency and varying performance requirements that a SAN may provide.
As with everything in IT, it always depends on what you need to accomplish. Just don't consider a SAN as a "bad thing" because of some of the issues that various vendors have created.
Something I would suggest, like with all equipment and software... don't use the latest and greatest for production environments. Some problem will always bite you. Let the community, or a dev/test environment, test things for a while to be sure to get some of the major problems fixed that will always exist in first generation products.
EricGenesis Hosting Solutions, LLC (genesishosting.com)
Genesis Public Cloud - No Compromise On-Demand OpenStack infrastructure
Genesis VMs - Easy to provision single VMs on our Genesis Public Cloud
Compare us against others at vpsbenchmarks.com!
Similar Threads
-
Downtime killing your site? Get a self-healing, auto-scaling Cloud VPS from VPS.NET!
By IGobyTerry in forum VPS Hosting OffersReplies: 0Last Post: 11-28-2010, 04:47 PM -
Recent Everdns.net Downtime
By WebCave in forum Domain NamesReplies: 4Last Post: 03-30-2009, 01:53 AM -
Recent Downtime
By Hastings in forum WebHostingTalk Subscribers ClubReplies: 25Last Post: 09-23-2007, 10:14 AM -
Recent Downtime? Tired of Fly-by-Night Hosts? Unmetered Servers w/14YR INC500 Company
By HostJedi in forum Dedicated Hosting OffersReplies: 11Last Post: 12-22-2005, 05:21 PM