Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 31

Hybrid View

  1. #1

    Should I buy LiteSpeed?

    I'm thinking about switching to Eleven2. They have a Cloud Server I'm interested in.

    For $200/month (self-managed) - it says

    8,192MB Memory
    480GB Hard Drive
    3,000 GB Bandwidth
    6.4GHz CPU Speed

    Right now I have a dedicated server for about $220/month with these specs:

    SuperMicro H8SMU AMD Opteron QuadCore SingleProc Sata [1Proc]
    AMD Opteron 1354 2.2GHz
    4GB RAM

    But, Eleven2 says I have to buy managed ($125 extra) to get Apache, otherwise it comes with a "Base OS".

    Should I switch to them and buy LiteSpeed? If so, which license for LiteSpeed should I get?

    Thank you

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Kansas City, Missouri
    Posts
    462
    Hello-

    If you service static content Litespeed is pretty fast using their proprietary LASPI communications mechanism. I would start with the 1-CPU license as the licenses are per CPU for HTTP processing and not PHP processing. If you service hundreds of requests per second it may be necessary to upgrade to a 2-CPU license.

    Good luck! :-)
    =>Admo.net Managed Hosting
    => Managed Hosting • Dedicated Servers • Colocation
    => Dark Fiber Access to 1102 Grand, Multiple Public Providers
    => Over •Sixteen• Years of Service

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Internet
    Posts
    1,161
    Wow they are trying to charge you for Apache? Well if that is the case then yeah get LiteSpeed.. (it will save you $) Otherwise I would not recommend getting LiteSpeed unless you are hosting a lot of clients/websites on the server..

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    /etc/my.cnf
    Posts
    10,657
    Quote Originally Posted by LuckyAnonymous View Post
    Otherwise I would not recommend getting LiteSpeed unless you are hosting a lot of clients/websites on the server..
    Why does everyone thinks its all to do with packing servers tight with clients?

    Have you ever took time to think that someone running Litespeed doesnt need as big servers compared to someone running Apache?

    I know for a fact that my 8GB servers which are utilizing only ~50% memory with Litespeed would ultize over 80% if I was to switch to Apache...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Kansas City, Missouri
    Posts
    462
    Quote Originally Posted by cd/home View Post
    Why does everyone thinks its all to do with packing servers tight with clients?

    Have you ever took time to think that someone running Litespeed doesnt need as big servers compared to someone running Apache?

    I know for a fact that my 8GB servers which are utilizing only ~50% memory with Litespeed would ultize over 80% if I was to switch to Apache...
    Not to mention its just plain faster. At any rate go with Litespeed if you are performing any dynamic processing for sites like you mentioned (Wordpress etc) you can't go wrong!
    =>Admo.net Managed Hosting
    => Managed Hosting • Dedicated Servers • Colocation
    => Dark Fiber Access to 1102 Grand, Multiple Public Providers
    => Over •Sixteen• Years of Service

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    5,525
    Quote Originally Posted by AdmoNet View Post
    Not to mention its just plain faster. At any rate go with Litespeed if you are performing any dynamic processing for sites like you mentioned (Wordpress etc) you can't go wrong!
    Well, they're charging for management, not necessarily just Apache. We do the same; charge +$149 for cPanel+LAMP management which includes a custom nginx, Varnish, etc. security enhanced stack.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Internet
    Posts
    1,161
    Quote Originally Posted by cd/home View Post
    Why does everyone thinks its all to do with packing servers tight with clients?

    Have you ever took time to think that someone running Litespeed doesnt need as big servers compared to someone running Apache?

    I know for a fact that my 8GB servers which are utilizing only ~50% memory with Litespeed would ultize over 80% if I was to switch to Apache...
    I simply recommend against LiteSpeed because you'll save money without it and will not notice a difference unless you have high traffic/lots of clients/websites, and even then it isn't that much more noticeable.
    Last edited by GeekDub; 05-03-2012 at 07:52 PM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    /etc/my.cnf
    Posts
    10,657
    Quote Originally Posted by LuckyAnonymous View Post
    I simply recommend against LiteSpeed because you'll save money without it and will not notice a difference unless you have high traffic/lots of clients/websites, and even then it is't that much more noticeable.
    Really?

    Well am saving money on not having to upgrade the likes of memory I have a number of Litespeed servers running on 8GB with ~50% utilization.

    I guess you havent used it or else you would know that no you dont need lots of traffic or lots of clients to actually see and feel the benifits of having it.
    UK Based Proactive Server Management.
    Zabbix Enterprise 24/7 Monitoring.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Internet
    Posts
    1,161
    Quote Originally Posted by cd/home View Post
    Really?

    Well am saving money on not having to upgrade the likes of memory I have a number of Litespeed servers running on 8GB with ~50% utilization.

    I guess you havent used it or else you would now that no you dont need lots of traffic or lots of clients to actually see and feel the benifits of having it.
    If you have low traffic (even greater) you won't be using much memory in the first place to notice.

    And yes I do use it as I host clients/resellers.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by cd/home View Post
    Really?

    Well am saving money on not having to upgrade the likes of memory I have a number of Litespeed servers running on 8GB with ~50% utilization.

    I guess you havent used it or else you would know that no you dont need lots of traffic or lots of clients to actually see and feel the benifits of having it.
    Little loose comment there. Ram is cheaper than Litespeed Just because it works for you doesn't mean it should be a yes/no standard - considering the "free" alternatives to apache as well.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by cd/home View Post
    I know for a fact that my 8GB servers which are utilizing only ~50% memory with Litespeed would ultize over 80% if I was to switch to Apache...
    And 20% if you switched to nginx :-)

    (I know, I know, not appropriate for all circumstances, but I couldn't resist).
    raindog308
    LowEndTalk administrator, LowEndBox editor

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by LuckyAnonymous View Post
    Wow they are trying to charge you for Apache?
    We do not charge for Apache. Self-managed is a default operating system where you can install whatever you need. Managed comes with cPanel installed (with Apache) and is ready to start hosting. It also includes 24/7 monitoring and support from us. Also note we can install Litespeed on your managed cloud server. You would just need to purchase a Litespeed license for your IP.
    Last edited by ScottJ; 05-03-2012 at 07:53 PM.
    Eleven2 Web Hosting - World-Wide Hosting, Done Right!

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Kansas City, Missouri
    Posts
    462
    :: Ponders :: Maybe I should start charging for Apache! Sheesh! That is pretty strange....
    =>Admo.net Managed Hosting
    => Managed Hosting • Dedicated Servers • Colocation
    => Dark Fiber Access to 1102 Grand, Multiple Public Providers
    => Over •Sixteen• Years of Service

  14. #14
    Thanks for the responses.

    Right now we have 5 different Wordpress sites and a vBulletin forum. I'm pretty sure we need PHP processing but maybe I'm wrong?

  15. #15
    Looks like I can't edit the thread now but as an update, I contacted them again after finding out how much Apache costs (or how much it doesn't cost, ahem) and this time he worded it differently:

    The difference between self managed and managed is on self managed you get a base OS install. You will be required to install everything with no support from us. Managed comes ready to go with Apache installed and Cpanel

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    /etc/my.cnf
    Posts
    10,657
    Quote Originally Posted by SyntraClick View Post
    Looks like I can't edit the thread now but as an update, I contacted them again after finding out how much Apache costs (or how much it doesn't cost, ahem) and this time he worded it differently:
    They aint charging for Apache but rather the time taken to install it, configure it, etc

    If its just a server setup you require I would get a quote from a server management provider as it would be likely cheaper depending on the work done of course.

  17. #17
    LiteSpeed loads php pages around 200ms faster then Apache. x200ms by x amount of sites on the server... enough said.
    HostXNow - Shared Web Hosting | Semi Dedicated Hosting | Enterprise Reseller Hosting | VPS Hosting

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    865
    Quote Originally Posted by HostXNow View Post
    LiteSpeed loads php pages around 200ms faster then Apache. x200ms by x amount of sites on the server... enough said.
    That's funny, considering I have high-load Apache-based servers that serve (non-cached) PHP pages in 4-7ms. I suppose LiteSpeed would make them load in the past, then.

  19. #19
    No, don't waste your money on litespeed, get unixy varnish and sit and wait for apache 2.4
    *~ Shared,Reseller, and Cloud VPS Provider ~*
    *~ Check out our site at 24Khost.com ~*
    *~ Birchtreelane Gifts, Antiques, Books, Collectibles Birchtreelane.com ~*

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    /etc/my.cnf
    Posts
    10,657
    Quote Originally Posted by sosolabs View Post
    No, don't waste your money on litespeed, get unixy varnish and sit and wait for apache 2.4
    What happens when the server comes under attack would your Apache + Varnish stack handle the HUGE connections/requests without bombing out?

    How do end-users configure the Varnish cache without contacting support unless you have a custom plugin?

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Houston, Texas, USA
    Posts
    3,262
    FYI, cd/home makes a living off of Litespeed. That's the only technology he's familiar with. He'll do whatever he can to dissuade others from using anything but Litespeed. He'll even resort to ad-hominem attacks like this one to promote his agenda. Always question what you read online.

    Disclosure: I love Varnish but also recommend Litespeed where it makes sense (and have clients using both technologies).

    Regards

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    /etc/my.cnf
    Posts
    10,657
    Quote Originally Posted by LuckyAnonymous View Post
    What is cheap to you, is expensive to others. It is all about taking other peoples view into consideration.
    Am not debating other wise, Merely said that Litespeed is cheaper and better in most cases then upgrading hardware which becomes outdated very quick in this field.

    Quote Originally Posted by UNIXy View Post
    FYI, cd/home makes a living off of Litespeed. That's the only technology he's familiar with. He'll do whatever he can to dissuade others from using anything but Litespeed. He'll even resort to ad-hominem attacks like this one to promote his agenda. Always question what you read online.
    Ive said before and I,ll say again if you want good solid performance with additional features compared to Apache and wish to have the flexiablity then Litespeed is for you.

    I can say that you make money from Varnish so your down talk of Litespeed and anyone who recommends Litespeed is nature to you.

    We have servers under our management for nearly everything going so saying we make money from Litespeed is abit daft...
    UK Based Proactive Server Management.
    Zabbix Enterprise 24/7 Monitoring.

  23. #23
    Shouldn't really compare LiteSpeed to Varnish as LiteSpeed is a web server where as Varnish is caching software. Better to compare Nginx to LiteSpeed.

    I use LiteSpeed, Nginx and Varnish depending on the setup, etc.
    HostXNow - Shared Web Hosting | Semi Dedicated Hosting | Enterprise Reseller Hosting | VPS Hosting

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    86
    I would suggest go for Litespeed, I have 2-CPU enterprise license and thinking to upgrade to 4-CPU.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Posts
    5,732
    I love Litespeed wouldn't move tbh.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-13-2012, 02:44 AM
  2. What license to buy for Litespeed web server ?
    By ckissi in forum Hosting Security and Technology
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-11-2011, 12:14 AM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-14-2011, 06:02 AM
  4. litespeed where to buy?
    By sharmaine1111 in forum Hosting Software and Control Panels
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 03-17-2010, 01:29 AM
  5. Will buy LiteSpeed. Does Proxyshield (or BlackLotus) still needed to prevent DDoS?
    By gigawire in forum Hosting Security and Technology
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 01-27-2008, 01:19 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •