Web Hosting Talk : Web Hosting Main Forums : Dedicated Server : the internet speed for home server hosting

[loverman]

Hi

i Have i Dell Server in my Home and i have a 2mbps internet connection so is that okey for a hosting a two or one forums

and i think there will be 5000 visters

and who is importent the up speed or the down speed

thanks

[PlusWebHost]

Originally Posted by loverman

Hi

i Have i Dell Server in my Home and i have a 2mbps internet connection so is that okey for a hosting a two or one forums

and i think there will be 5000 visters

and who is importent the up speed or the down speed

thanks

Hello,

If you mean 5,000 visitors at once, then no there is no way your connection can handle this. Upload speed is definitely the important part for hosting.

If you mean 5,000 hits per month... with cache support, and gzip... maybe. 5,000 unique visitors a month would still be pushing your connection to it's limit quite often.

[Lincxu]

I would suggest you sign up with a hosting service instead for such specs.

[loverman]

what about if i have 3mbps uplink and 3,000 visters not at once but in i day 24h

and thanks

[EDIS]

Possible, but a very very very bad idea.

William

[loverman]

sorry if my english languge is bad

but i don't have choise to get vps or a server from onther place

so i have to manage it and host it in my home

i need your help and your experience

is my 3mbps good or should i make it more then that for example 5mbps

[aodat2]

Getting a 10Mbps connection or higher might be a better solution. There's not really much use if you're at a 3Mbps or 5Mbps connection for about 3000 unique visitors per day. That's basically just not a good idea. Bad idea either way.

[Lee-RackSRV]

If you weigh up the power usage/ bandwidth of having a seperate webserver at home you may find it more cost effective that you use a shared hosting platform.

[PepperAdmin]

Minimum of 10Mbps will be a reasonable solution if you have 3k users per day. You imagine DC's will be having such a high speed connections at their end and how it works ? So 3Mbps is not a solution. And it is better you go with some good hosting providers as management will become a head ache for you.

[zdrux]

You can afford to get a 5Mbps connection, but not a $5/mo shared hosting plan?

In the end, instead of having 3k users visit your site, none of them will end up seeing it because of the speed.

[Grumps]

Even if you had 100mbit home connection, latency is going to frustrate your users to no end... You can't realistically host a serious website from your home. There's also the issue of sending mail from your forum. Your ISP may cut your connection as a spammer in matter of days. You also need to check with your ISP that webhosting is actually allowed.

[Lee-RackSRV]

Power usage on that dell server alone per month would cost more than a shared hosting account/

[server-guy]

what i recommend you is send your server to any datacenter near you to colocate. It will be best idea or just get a dedi from good provider

[atlasnetworkseric]

Originally Posted by Grumps

Even if you had 100mbit home connection, latency is going to frustrate your users to no end.

It might, but then again, many access ISPs are peered quite well, so latency might not actually be an issue.

For example, on my Comcast connection at home, I have sub 50ms latency to Google, Facebook, Qwest, TW Telecom, ATT, etc. 50ms isn't going to frustrate anyone browsing a forum.

I'm not saying it's a great idea, though! Shared hosting is definitely the better route.

[Grumps]

Originally Posted by atlasnetworkseric

It might, but then again, many access ISPs are peered quite well, so latency might not actually be an issue.

For example, on my Comcast connection at home, I have sub 50ms latency to Google, Facebook, Qwest, TW Telecom, ATT, etc. 50ms isn't going to frustrate anyone browsing a forum.

A home to home connection will most likely have more hops than a home to datacenter or datacenter to home. and each hop is also more likely to be slower. On top of that, the sites you listed are all big sites that have large number if proxies to have geological spread. So, that's not a fair comparison.